Since July 1/03 I have not worked, due to a injury i got playing soft ball( no more sliding I will be a stand up player from now on). And in coursewith not working bills get behind!So in Sept Corporate Greed Inc (ENMAX) sent me a disconnection notice.Understandable.So after futile attempts at making payment arrangements (not willing toexcept any of course).I swallowed my pride and went out to seek assistancebefore the cut off date.I found some very nice peeps at the Salvation Army. (Boy do I have a BIGdonation to make when I start working again) who were willing to offerassistance.The said it would take a week for them to get it to CorporateGreed.I immediately called Corporate Greed and informed them what was happening.Told them the money would be mailed out by those wonderful peeps at theSalvation Army, and would arrive late the next week, and even told them itwould most likely be Thursday or Friday.young guy says OK he will extend the cut off date till then.Well! On the Thursday guess what.DARKNESS FELL!yup, with agreements made and the check in the mail BOOM!So I run to my neighbors and called Corporate Greed and asked them whathappened? Why was I cut off?they said they money was supposed to be in last week. I informed them Icalled them and told them The money would be in today or tomorrow and thatit would be extended till then!(obviously it didn't make it in on theThursday).Well apparently they had no record of that call. (surprise surprise). I hadto get The beautiful peeps at the Salvation Army to fax them the details.Had to be letter head and faxed as Corporate Greed wouldn't trust them.Afterthe fax was sent Corporate Greed had me reconnected that nite. Very timelyresponse I must say and appreciated.

Did it end there?

OF course not.

I just got my Corporate Greed bill and guess what?

Charged for the reconnection ($67.28)AND a Deposit of $210.00 due to mydisconnection!!!!!!!

Lovely peeps I just spoke to at Corporate Greed. (Their call center staffare very good!I would hate to deal with someone like me when i get irate!)and now expecting a call back tomorrow (maybe) from a supervisor.Bet I can guess what the supervisor will say . "No record of the call sosorry we can't waive the fee's."

Now this is a city owned business and they forget who pays the bills. Theyhave a monopoly and ding us to no end!They WILL NOT accept responsibility for there mistakes and the little guygets screwed again. For give me for spending money on food and shelter!

Another highlight of the bill is this......I got a $7.75 credit for a then a few lines later I get a "Cost RecoveryRider" of $5.77Sound like they are trying to recover from the "Elec Energy Charge Adj"Have you looked at you bill in detail? Amazing the things that are on there.

Nothing makes you feel like a small fish in a large ocean then dealing witha monopoly. (or would that small fish swallowed by a large fish)

Sorry to carry on about my feelings but DAM it made me feel better!(And I will send this forth to Corporate Greed depending on the response Iget from the supervisor)

Once upon a time a couple of years ago, Ralph had a program to helppeople who couldn't make their utilities, It was $1000 for anyalbertan, once only. It's probably still in place, but there wereconditions. You had to apply at the welfare or social assistanceofffice, and had to have a disconnect notice in hand. Had to be lowincome.

Check it out make a few calls, maybe it's still there for you...

Post by CooterSince July 1/03 I have not worked, due to a injury i got playing soft ball( no more sliding I will be a stand up player from now on). And in coursewith not working bills get behind!So in Sept Corporate Greed Inc (ENMAX) sent me a disconnection notice.Understandable.So after futile attempts at making payment arrangements (not willing toexcept any of course).I swallowed my pride and went out to seek assistancebefore the cut off date.I found some very nice peeps at the Salvation Army. (Boy do I have a BIGdonation to make when I start working again) who were willing to offerassistance.The said it would take a week for them to get it to CorporateGreed.I immediately called Corporate Greed and informed them what was happening.Told them the money would be mailed out by those wonderful peeps at theSalvation Army, and would arrive late the next week, and even told them itwould most likely be Thursday or Friday.young guy says OK he will extend the cut off date till then.Well! On the Thursday guess what.DARKNESS FELL!yup, with agreements made and the check in the mail BOOM!So I run to my neighbors and called Corporate Greed and asked them whathappened? Why was I cut off?they said they money was supposed to be in last week. I informed them Icalled them and told them The money would be in today or tomorrow and thatit would be extended till then!(obviously it didn't make it in on theThursday).Well apparently they had no record of that call. (surprise surprise). I hadto get The beautiful peeps at the Salvation Army to fax them the details.Had to be letter head and faxed as Corporate Greed wouldn't trust them.Afterthe fax was sent Corporate Greed had me reconnected that nite. Very timelyresponse I must say and appreciated.Did it end there?OF course not.I just got my Corporate Greed bill and guess what?Charged for the reconnection ($67.28)AND a Deposit of $210.00 due to mydisconnection!!!!!!!Lovely peeps I just spoke to at Corporate Greed. (Their call center staffare very good!I would hate to deal with someone like me when i get irate!)and now expecting a call back tomorrow (maybe) from a supervisor.Bet I can guess what the supervisor will say . "No record of the call sosorry we can't waive the fee's."Now this is a city owned business and they forget who pays the bills. Theyhave a monopoly and ding us to no end!They WILL NOT accept responsibility for there mistakes and the little guygets screwed again. For give me for spending money on food and shelter!Another highlight of the bill is this......I got a $7.75 credit for a then a few lines later I get a "Cost RecoveryRider" of $5.77Sound like they are trying to recover from the "Elec Energy Charge Adj"Have you looked at you bill in detail? Amazing the things that are on there.Nothing makes you feel like a small fish in a large ocean then dealing witha monopoly. (or would that small fish swallowed by a large fish)Sorry to carry on about my feelings but DAM it made me feel better!(And I will send this forth to Corporate Greed depending on the response Iget from the supervisor)

Post by CooterSince July 1/03 I have not worked, due to a injury i got playing soft ball( no more sliding I will be a stand up player from now on). And in coursewith not working bills get behind!

<snip>

Or what you could have done is called them BEFORE you got the cut offnotice. Let them know you would be late with your payment.

Why do people always cry foul when they let their bills go unpaid for awhilethen get services cutoff? I have been in situations where I couldn't makebill payments because of a loss of employment. Know what the first thing Idid was? I called my landlord and asked for an extension. I called myutilities and asked the same thing. And guess what .. they were quite happyI came to them beforehand. I was late with everything but was able tocatchup within a month. No interuption in service. No eviction.

Post by CooterSince July 1/03 I have not worked, due to a injury i got playing soft ball( no more sliding I will be a stand up player from now on). And in coursewith not working bills get behind!

<snip>Or what you could have done is called them BEFORE you got the cut offnotice. Let them know you would be late with your payment.Why do people always cry foul when they let their bills go unpaid for awhilethen get services cutoff? I have been in situations where I couldn't makebill payments because of a loss of employment. Know what the first thing Idid was? I called my landlord and asked for an extension. I called myutilities and asked the same thing. And guess what .. they were quite happyI came to them beforehand. I was late with everything but was able tocatchup within a month. No interuption in service. No eviction.

Post by MadRedHatterOr what you could have done is called them BEFORE you got the cut offnotice. Let them know you would be late with your payment.Why do people always cry foul when they let their bills go unpaid for awhilethen get services cutoff? I have been in situations where I couldn't makebill payments because of a loss of employment. Know what the first thing Idid was? I called my landlord and asked for an extension. I called myutilities and asked the same thing.

Indeed, it works with banks, and other organizations as well. If you can arrangeto pay even part of the bills (and arrange it well before you're actually cutoff) then you can get decent treatment.

If you wait and wait and wait and pay nothing and say nothing, then they'llfigure you're probably just a deadbeat trying to steal from them.

Post by MadRedHatterOr what you could have done is called them BEFORE you got the cut offnotice. Let them know you would be late with your payment.Why do people always cry foul when they let their bills go unpaid for awhilethen get services cutoff? I have been in situations where I couldn't makebill payments because of a loss of employment. Know what the first thing Idid was? I called my landlord and asked for an extension. I called myutilities and asked the same thing.

Indeed, it works with banks, and other organizations as well. If you can arrangeto pay even part of the bills (and arrange it well before you're actually cutoff) then you can get decent treatment.If you wait and wait and wait and pay nothing and say nothing, then they'llfigure you're probably just a deadbeat trying to steal from them.

Exactly! During my times of trouble (and we all have them) I was responsibleenough to contact all the people I owed money. They appreciated my honestyand worked with me through it. And because of my actions my credit ratingwasn't affected.

<snip>Or what you could have done is called them BEFORE you got the cut offnotice. Let them know you would be late with your payment.Why do people always cry foul when they let their bills go unpaid for

awhile

Post by MadRedHatterthen get services cutoff? I have been in situations where I couldn't makebill payments because of a loss of employment. Know what the first thing Idid was? I called my landlord and asked for an extension. I called myutilities and asked the same thing. And guess what .. they were quite

happy

Post by MadRedHatterI came to them beforehand. I was late with everything but was able tocatchup within a month. No interuption in service. No eviction.

Post by Tom2Tec| Yeah, the nerve of these companies, EXPECTING YOU TO PAY FOR WHAT YOU USE!Yah, and what nerve to expect good and humane service from these monopolisticcompanies.2tec ~ from the far sideps. Great nickname, it's very appropriate

OgreMan <***@telus.net> wrote in message news:SMihb.770$***@edtnps84...

| Enmax is not a monopoly.

ROTFLMAO ... sure dood, as if there's any real competition. Maybe you buy thatbs, but personally, I'm not that naive. Please, just go back to your corporatefantasies and don't expect me to consider your point as valid. By the way, areyou having fun being a wage slave?

corporate fantasies?? Is this what passes for pinko-commie ramblingsnowadays? I expected better.

Being a wage slave is pretty good actually. I make enough to cover mytuition, food, rent, UTILITIES and the occasional beer. Mind you, it mightbe because I don't waste my time lamenting how the system's got me down. Tryworking instead of bitching, you might make enough to donate to some of yourpoor 'friends' who just need one last handout.

Post by Tom2Tec| Enmax is not a monopoly.ROTFLMAO ... sure dood, as if there's any real competition. Maybe you buy thatbs, but personally, I'm not that naive. Please, just go back to your corporatefantasies and don't expect me to consider your point as valid. By the way, areyou having fun being a wage slave?2tec ~ doesn't buy into bs

OgreMan <***@telus.net> wrote in message news:TuAhb.53023$***@news1.telusplanet.net...| Enmax is not a monopoly.|| corporate fantasies?? Is this what passes for pinko-commie ramblings| nowadays? I expected better.

Yup, just more labeling and prejudging ... sadly, I expected no better.

| Being a wage slave is pretty good actually. I make enough to cover my| tuition, food, rent, UTILITIES and the occasional beer. Mind you, it might| be because I don't waste my time lamenting how the system's got me down. Try| working instead of bitching, you might make enough to donate to some of your| poor 'friends' who just need one last handout.

Slavery is slavery. Well, at least you're happy, I guess. By the way, beingcharitable is a good thing. I find it the most rewarding thing, amazinglyenough. However, I doubt you'll understand. But hey, maybe you can, after all,who am I to judge you. Personally, I think you have every right to your opinionsand every right to learn from your own mistakes. In fact, I'd defend your rightto have them asnd make them with my very life if that is ever required of me.

It's just sad , in my opinion, that corporations, and the people who hide behindthem, don't have the same respect for either of us.

Pham Nuwen <***@libertydice.org> wrote in message news:***@libertydice.org...| Tom2Tec wrote:| > 2tec ~ promotes freedom and responsibility|| How can you say that with a straight face, while promoting minimum| wages, and price controls?

It's not hard. It's called questioning authority, which is my responsibility.and, as well, it comes from having the courage to speak out against injustice.It's just too bad more people didn't do more to balance the unbridled power ofthe establishment. I guess it seems easier to go along and be comfortably numb.However, trust me, eventually we all have to settle our own accounts. I'd ratherpay up front myself. <grin>

promotes freedom and responsibility | | How can you say that with astraight face, while promoting minimum | wages, and price controls?It's not hard. It's called questioning authority, which is myresponsibility.

and, as well, it comes from having the courage tospeak out against injustice. It's just too bad more people didn't domore to balance the unbridled power of the establishment. I guess itseems easier to go along and be comfortably numb. However, trust me,eventually we all have to settle our own accounts. I'd rather pay upfront myself. <grin>

My you have definitely found a libertarian slant in the past few weekshaven't you? You seem to be on the right track, now all you have to dois get over the "altruism is good" block. I know it's hard it was for metoo, but once you realize that altruism through the use of force doesmore damage than it can ever do good then you'll be well on your way tobeing a hard core an-cap like me. =8)

I never said it was. However, authority without responsibility is like sexwithout love. It's cheap. shallow and can't be maintained. ;~)

| My you have definitely found a libertarian slant in the past few weeks| haven't you? You seem to be on the right track, now all you have to do| is get over the "altruism is good" block. I know it's hard it was for me| too, but once you realize that altruism through the use of force does| more damage than it can ever do good then you'll be well on your way to| being a hard core an-cap like me. =8)

Heavin forbid! Get over altruism? No thanks, but I'm no parasite. I always tryto give as good as I get.

Post by Tom2Tec| My you have definitely found a libertarian slant in the past few weeks| haven't you? You seem to be on the right track, now all you have to do| is get over the "altruism is good" block. I know it's hard it was for me| too, but once you realize that altruism through the use of force does| more damage than it can ever do good then you'll be well on your way to| being a hard core an-cap like me. =8)Heavin forbid! Get over altruism? No thanks, but I'm no parasite. I always tryto give as good as I get.

Re-read what I wrote, you seemed to have missed the point. I didn't sayyou should get over altruism, you need to get over "altruism is good".Most Altruism does more harm than good, only altruism that flows fromthe individual without force is ever good, and even then only if theindividual properly applies his/her altruism to solve the problem,instead of just enabling those in need to continue being in need.

Pham Nuwen <***@libertydice.org> wrote in message news:***@libertydice.org...| Tom2Tec wrote:| > 2tec ~ promotes freedom and responsibility|| How can you say that with a straight face, while promoting minimum| wages, and price controls?

Just to be perfectly clear. I'd just as soon eliminate "minimium wage" or raiseit to where it should be. Either is acceptable to me. No minimium or at leastthe same, in real dollars as it was in, say, 1953.

I believe that if wages were free to find thier own levels, they would behigher. Personally, I believe that "minimium wage" has been used to suppresswages for the sole benefit of the overly affluent and big business.

As for price controls. I'm against controlling a free market. Now, if only wehad one.

Post by Tom2Tec| > 2tec ~ promotes freedom and responsibility|| How can you say that with a straight face, while promoting minimum| wages, and price controls?BTW, please, please, quote me where I promote "low" minimium wages or pricecontrols. I dare ya.Now you're the one misrepresenting others.Just to be perfectly clear. I'd just as soon eliminate "minimium wage" or raiseit to where it should be. Either is acceptable to me. No minimium or at leastthe same, in real dollars as it was in, say, 1953.I believe that if wages were free to find thier own levels, they would behigher. Personally, I believe that "minimium wage" has been used to suppresswages for the sole benefit of the overly affluent and big business.

Minimum wage doesn't suppress wages. It's a MINIMUM, not a MAXIMUM. Forfurther clarification, I direct you to www.dictionary.com.

Post by Tom2TecAs for price controls. I'm against controlling a free market. Now, if only wehad one.2tec ~ cuts to the quick

No worse you seemed to be promoting "high" minimum wages, and youseemed to be saying in this tread that the price should somehow beforced/regulated so it is lower. I'm sorry if I was wrong on that,because that is the impression you gave off with all your "rich isbad" banter. If you are in favor of a free market, and your beef is justwith the regulated/corporatist/monopoly market then, hey we are on thesame side.

Now you're the one misrepresenting others.Just to be perfectly clear. I'd just as soon eliminate "minimiumwage" or raise it to where it should be. Either is acceptable to me.No minimium or at least the same, in real dollars as it was in, say,1953.

Raising the "minimum" has only ever had one effect, increasedunemployment. Like most altruism, it is it's own punishment.

I believe that if wages were free to find thier own levels, theywould be higher. Personally, I believe that "minimium wage" has beenused to suppress wages for the sole benefit of the overly affluentand big business.

It doesn't suppress wages so much as employment.

As for price controls. I'm against controlling a free market. Now, ifonly we had one.

Have you always been this libertarian, and I just missed it? Thisdoesn't sound like your regular "eat the rich" rant.

| No worse you seemed to be promoting "high" minimum wages, and you| seemed to be saying in this tread that the price should somehow be| forced/regulated so it is lower. I'm sorry if I was wrong on that,| because that is the impression you gave off with all your "rich is| bad" banter. If you are in favor of a free market, and your beef is just| with the regulated/corporatist/monopoly market then, hey we are on the| same side.

At the risk of repeating myself again. I'm not against wealth, if it's honestlyearned. However, I believe that's almost never the case anymore. I absolutelybelieve in the free market. I also absolutely believe we don't have one. I don'tmind running in the race, but I only want to win if I can do so fairly. Winningany other way isn't worth anything.

| Raising the "minimum" has only ever had one effect, increased| unemployment. Like most altruism, it is it's own punishment.

Not true. If the minimium wage was a realistic return for effort invested, wewould all benefit as there would then be capital to be invested. If more peoplehad more capital, more investments would lead to greater economic diversity andgrowth. We are being strangled by our own greed. It's happened to every previouscivilization and now it's happening to ours.

| It doesn't suppress wages so much as employment.

I believe that what suppresses employment is an upper class which usesunemployment as a threat to ensure compliance and the unwilling co-operation ofthose without fair or free access to capitial.

| Have you always been this libertarian, and I just missed it? This| doesn't sound like your regular "eat the rich" rant.

Perhaps not everyone fits into the narrow right versus left viewpoint that youseem to assume they do? By the way, I've been a rational anarchist ever since Itook the time to investigate what being responsible really means.

Post by Tom2TecAt the risk of repeating myself again. I'm not against wealth, ifit's honestly earned. However, I believe that's almost never the caseanymore. I absolutely believe in the free market. I also absolutelybelieve we don't have one. I don't mind running in the race, but Ionly want to win if I can do so fairly. Winning any other way isn'tworth anything.

Absolutely.

Post by Tom2Tec| Raising the "minimum" has only ever had one effect, increased |unemployment. Like most altruism, it is it's own punishment.Not true. If the minimium wage was a realistic return for effortinvested, we would all benefit as there would then be capital to beinvested. If more people had more capital, more investments wouldlead to greater economic diversity and growth. We are being strangledby our own greed. It's happened to every previous civilization andnow it's happening to ours.

The second you impose a minimum wage though, you no longer have a freemarket. Plus are you really gaining anything? would you rather see 80people working for $8/h or 100 people working at $6.40/h ? See thedifference? How do you think those 20 people are going to survive? Offthe avails of the 80 through taxation is how.

Not to mention how Inflation kicks in under your plan. Any wage not setby the natural forces of the market, are doomed to increase inflation.

I agree people should be paid more, I disagree the State has anybusiness in forcing businesses to do so.

Post by Tom2Tec| It doesn't suppress wages so much as employment.I believe that what suppresses employment is an upper class whichuses unemployment as a threat to ensure compliance and the unwillingco-operation of those without fair or free access to capitial.

Wow, that is an interesting outlook, it doesn't hold water, butinteresting none the less. In case you haven't been paying attentionthere is plenty of fair access to capital in our society, as the is tojobs. Over the next 20 years we are going to be seeing the retirement ofthe largest generation ever, what that means is a distinct lack ofworkers. In a free market that mean wages naturally will go up asworkers become harder and harder to find. Unfortunately as long as wedeal with a regulated market (with the odd free market pocket) overallwe will continue to see wages regulated too.

Post by Tom2Tec| Have you always been this libertarian, and I just missed it? This |doesn't sound like your regular "eat the rich" rant.Perhaps not everyone fits into the narrow right versus left viewpointthat you seem to assume they do?

I'm the first to denounce the left and right. Neither find any favorwith me, as both are the tools of Statism.

Post by Tom2TecBy the way, I've been a rational anarchist ever since I took the timeto investigate what being responsible really means.

Part of responsibility is accepting you can't be responsible for others.

If you eleminate the "minimum" wage, do you honestly think the businesswould pay more? Hell, they would pay less, because they could, and therewould be no way to stop them.

Post by Tom2Tec| > 2tec ~ promotes freedom and responsibility|| How can you say that with a straight face, while promoting minimum| wages, and price controls?BTW, please, please, quote me where I promote "low" minimium wages or pricecontrols. I dare ya.Now you're the one misrepresenting others.Just to be perfectly clear. I'd just as soon eliminate "minimium wage" or raiseit to where it should be. Either is acceptable to me. No minimium or at leastthe same, in real dollars as it was in, say, 1953.I believe that if wages were free to find thier own levels, they would behigher. Personally, I believe that "minimium wage" has been used to suppresswages for the sole benefit of the overly affluent and big business.As for price controls. I'm against controlling a free market. Now, if only wehad one.2tec ~ cuts to the quick

Regardless of what Enmax is or isn't, the very fact of getting cut off issimple. Pay the bills and quit gripping.

As others in this group have done, if you anticipate going in to arrearsfor whatever reason, acknowledging it with your creditors is alwaysadvisable. Many of the utilities I have found go to great lengths to avoidcutting clients off. Many have families too and understand thedifficulties no work creates. Yes, you'll have the odd jerk who youcannot make any concessions with. If that's the case move up the ladder.Or ask for someone else. At some point you , or I , or all of us,have to realize they are running a business. Like it or not, they wantprofit. They also want to pay their bills.

Unfortunately there is no 'real ' competition who offers any substantiallylower prices in Calgary. Nor any competition who will extend credit to sixmonths or more. If you want off the grid, go solar or produce your ownsource of power. If you have a surplus, heck you never know , you can evensell it back to Enmax.

| Regardless of what Enmax is or isn't, the very fact of getting cut off is| simple. Pay the bills and quit gripping.

The problem is, is that some people can no longer afford to pay. The cost of thenecessities exceeds the amount earned at minimium wage.

| As others in this group have done, if you anticipate going in to arrears| for whatever reason, acknowledging it with your creditors is always| advisable. Many of the utilities I have found go to great lengths to avoid| cutting clients off. Many have families too and understand the| difficulties no work creates. Yes, you'll have the odd jerk who you| cannot make any concessions with. If that's the case move up the ladder.| Or ask for someone else. At some point you , or I , or all of us,| have to realize they are running a business. Like it or not, they want| profit. They also want to pay their bills.

I agree, reasonable profits are necessary to a normal business. However,excessive profits are the issue here. Normally competition ensures thatexcessive profits are not achievable, except, as you pointed out, there isn'tany. Two, I believe they don't want to go to great lengths, they'd rather not dothat much work, they have no choice as it's policy, they'd rather collect theextra fees and they don't really care. Furthermore, no, they aren't running abusiness, they are running a public utility. One that we already paid for andwas built as a shared public service. It's just like saying Petro-Canada couldtake over Deerfoot Trail and run it as a toll road. If you don't pay the toll,you can't use the road. Is that a good thing? I don't think so.

| Unfortunately there is no 'real ' competition who offers any substantially| lower prices in Calgary. Nor any competition who will extend credit to six| months or more. If you want off the grid, go solar or produce your own| source of power. If you have a surplus, heck you never know , you can even| sell it back to Enmax.

If only this was possible. However, Enmax would never pay you as much as theycharge you. Nor do they, at this point, allow that to happen. Heck, they won'teven put in meters that indicate time of usage so you could use power at nonpeak, therefore cheaper times.

My main gripe is the high salaries. I wouldn't mind paying if it wasn't makingsome priviliged people unfairly wealthy.

Post by Tom2Tec| Regardless of what Enmax is or isn't, the very fact of getting cut off is| simple. Pay the bills and quit griping.The problem is, is that some people can no longer afford to pay. The cost of thenecessities exceeds the amount earned at minimium wage.

The cost of providing power (in this instance) doesn't have anything to do withthe financial staus of the users. If you're on minimum wage and you can't affordto pay for your electricity supplies, then you'd better get yourself a roomie orjust use far less power.

Post by Tom2Tec| At some point you , or I , or all of us,| have to realize they are running a business. Like it or not, they want| profit. They also want to pay their bills.I agree, reasonable profits are necessary to a normal business. However,excessive profits are the issue here. Normally competition ensures thatexcessive profits are not achievable, except, as you pointed out, there isn'tany.

The provincial government is still trying to create competition, but as yet itapplies only in the industrial sector, not the residential. That's whyresidential rates are still regulated... and the key criterion for changing theprice is the return on equity that companies like Enmax achieve. That means thatthey are regulated against excessive profits.

Post by Tom2TecTwo, I believe they don't want to go to great lengths, they'd rather not dothat much work, they have no choice as it's policy, they'd rather collect theextra fees and they don't really care.

"That much work" for what? They work to supply power, and all the maintenanceand construction needed to do so. It's not their job to give power away for freeto anyone who doesn't bother to pay their bills.

Post by Tom2Tec| If you want off the grid, go solar or produce your own| source of power. If you have a surplus, heck you never know , you can even| sell it back to Enmax.If only this was possible. However, Enmax would never pay you as much as theycharge you.

No business will buy from customers at retail prices; their only way to make aliving is to buy wholesale and sell retail. The value of unpredictable andunreliable residential back-power is far far lower than the value of generatedpower that can be called upon to produce any time the load on the systemincreases.

Post by Tom2TecNor do they, at this point, allow that to happen. Heck, they won'teven put in meters that indicate time of usage so you could use power at nonpeak, therefore cheaper times.

Industrial users can do that, but residential use is still regulated at fixedrates, so it wouldn't make any difference. If you want, you could have suchmeters installed on your home, though. It probably doesn't cost too terriblymuch. Of course, if the whole system goes to instantaneous pricing, then youmight find yourself paying very high rates at some times.

<GlennMor> wrote in message news:***@4ax.com...| On Fri, 10 Oct 2003 14:17:34 GMT, "Tom2Tec" <***@hotmail.com>| wrote:|| >HD <#$%^@&*&&^.com> wrote in message news:pYshb.58083$***@pd7tw3no...| >| >| Regardless of what Enmax is or isn't, the very fact of getting cut off is| >| simple. Pay the bills and quit griping.| >| >The problem is, is that some people can no longer afford to pay. The cost ofthe| >necessities exceeds the amount earned at minimium wage.|| The cost of providing power (in this instance) doesn't have anything to dowith| the financial staus of the users. If you're on minimum wage and you can'tafford| to pay for your electricity supplies, then you'd better get yourself a roomieor| just use far less power.

and if you've already done both those things?

| >| At some point you , or I , or all of us,| >| have to realize they are running a business. Like it or not, they want| >| profit. They also want to pay their bills.| >| >I agree, reasonable profits are necessary to a normal business. However,| >excessive profits are the issue here. Normally competition ensures that| >excessive profits are not achievable, except, as you pointed out, there isn't| >any.|| The provincial government is still trying to create competition, but as yet it| applies only in the industrial sector, not the residential. That's why| residential rates are still regulated... and the key criterion for changingthe| price is the return on equity that companies like Enmax achieve. That meansthat| they are regulated against excessive profits.

Sure, sure they are. There's been a 100% increase in my power bill despite thefact I use less power now than ten years ago. You, sir, are ignoring theevidence and the fact of the matter. They've corrupted the process. So, no, Idon't believe they are regulated effectively.

| >Two, I believe they don't want to go to great lengths, they'd rather not do| >that much work, they have no choice as it's policy, they'd rather collect the| >extra fees and they don't really care.|| "That much work" for what? They work to supply power, and all the maintenance| and construction needed to do so. It's not their job to give power away forfree| to anyone who doesn't bother to pay their bills.

No one asked for free power. You know, when you make such extreme exaggerations,you only prove my point.

| >| If you want off the grid, go solar or produce your own| >| source of power. If you have a surplus, heck you never know , you caneven| >| sell it back to Enmax.| >| >If only this was possible. However, Enmax would never pay you as much as they| >charge you.|| No business will buy from customers at retail prices; their only way to make a| living is to buy wholesale and sell retail. The value of unpredictable and| unreliable residential back-power is far far lower than the value of generated| power that can be called upon to produce any time the load on the system| increases.

Other utilities manage. By the way, they are not a private business, for thetenth time, They are a PUBLIC UTILITY.

| >Nor do they, at this point, allow that to happen. Heck, they won't| >even put in meters that indicate time of usage so you could use power at non| >peak, therefore cheaper times.|| Industrial users can do that, but residential use is still regulated at fixed| rates, so it wouldn't make any difference. If you want, you could have such| meters installed on your home, though. It probably doesn't cost too terribly| much. Of course, if the whole system goes to instantaneous pricing, then you| might find yourself paying very high rates at some times.

No, no you can't. Sheesh

| >My main gripe is the high salaries.|| Well, we all know that from long experience.

Post by Tom2Tec| to pay for your electricity supplies, then you'd better get yourself a roomie| or just use far less power.and if you've already done both those things?

If? So what? if you can't afford something, you shouldn't buy it.

Post by Tom2Tec| price is the return on equity that companies like Enmax achieve. That means| that they are regulated against excessive profits.Sure, sure they are. There's been a 100% increase in my power bill despite thefact I use less power now than ten years ago.

Your usage and your costs aren't the criterion; it's return on equity thatdrives the regulated prices of just about any monopoly (natural or otherwise).

Post by Tom2TecIt's not their job to give power away forfree| to anyone who doesn't bother to pay their bills.No one asked for free power. You know, when you make such extreme exaggerations,you only prove my point.

Look a few lines above. You wrote "and if you've already done both thosethings", meaning cut back on usage and gotten help to pay for it. What did youmean, then, if not free power from the companies that supply it?

Post by Tom2Tec| No business will buy from customers at retail prices; their only way to make a| living is to buy wholesale and sell retail. The value of unpredictable and| unreliable residential back-power is far far lower than the value of generated| power that can be called upon to produce any time the load on the system| increases.Other utilities manage. By the way, they are not a private business, for thetenth time, They are a PUBLIC UTILITY.

Only if forced to do so, and even then they require considerable compensation topermit such nonsense. Public or not has no bearing (you still come up with themost amazing non-sequiturs) since it is in the public's interest not to have tosubsidize uneconomic activities by public power companies, and it is of coursenot at all in the interest of the paying consumer to have to subsidize thievingscoundrels who steal from the system.

Post by Tom2Tec| Industrial users can do that, but residential use is still regulated at fixed| rates, so it wouldn't make any difference. If you want, you could have such| meters installed on your home, though. It probably doesn't cost too terribly| much. Of course, if the whole system goes to instantaneous pricing, then you| might find yourself paying very high rates at some times.No, no you can't. Sheesh

Can't what"? Install instantaneous rated meters? Of course you can, but you'llget charged the same rates for power anyway. If, however, you install a cheatingmeter, that underreports your use of power, then you will have committed a fraudand deserve the full weight of the Law against you.

Post by Tom2Tec| >My main gripe is the high salaries.|| Well, we all know that from long experience.So, address the issue. Oh, you can't, so therefore you avoid it.

What issue? High salaries is your own obsession, not an issue in and of itself.

If you want to talk about corporate (mis)governance, then that's another type oftopic, namely stealing from shareholders. It has nothing to do with retailprices, employee wages, statutory minimum wages, or the like.

Is it glamorous, no. Nor is it meant to be. Honestly Tom, how manypeople in this province earn the *minimum* wage, or even better how manystay there for any length of time, or depend on only one job. Christeven burger flippers make $7-$8/h nowadays.

Want to ease their burden Tom, get the Fed's to remove income tax fromeveryone. Not only will it help these people out, but the rest of uswould have more money, thus more buying power, which would translateinto more jobs.

Pham ~ doesn't play the blues for those unwilling to control their spending.

Pham Nuwen <***@libertydice.org> wrote in message news:***@libertydice.org...| Tom2Tec wrote:| > The cost of the necessities exceeds the amount earned at minimium| > wage.|| You know I see this claim made all the time, and every time I see it, I| just have to call bollix.|| Tom if a person can't live on $826-$944 dollars a month they aren't| trying very hard.|| 35h * $5.90 * 4weeks = $826| 40h * $5.90 * 4weeks = $944|| ok, what is the Tax on all that? Maybe $200 ($200 dollars you are sure| to get back BTW, though I'd seriously talk to my employer about| arranging to give me the money up front)|| So let's call it $626/m or just to be conservative $600/m|| $400 rent inc. water and electric(don't tell me it can't be done cause| that is bollix)| $100 food (again don't tell me it can't be done)| $30 phone| $20 mad money (a pint of beer at the pub each week)| $50 savings/debt payment|| And that is a fairly worst case scenario.

What about bus fare, clothing, bank fees, insurance, health care, dental work,Internet, childcare and or support, school fees, gas, medicine, facility & userfees, etc, etc. Oh, and don't forget that you can't afford time off, pets,music, etc. or all the other "rewards" of working. You over-simplify things.Sure it can be done. Is it fair. No.

| Is it glamorous, no. Nor is it meant to be. Honestly Tom, how many| people in this province earn the *minimum* wage, or even better how many| stay there for any length of time, or depend on only one job. Christ| even burger flippers make $7-$8/h nowadays.

LOL, thirty percent of the people in Alberta make minimium wage and the numbersare rising. Of course, that's of no concern. So much for progress.

| Want to ease their burden Tom, get the Fed's to remove income tax from| everyone. Not only will it help these people out, but the rest of us| would have more money, thus more buying power, which would translate| into more jobs.

Sure, minimum wage, in real dollars has been dropping for thirty years. Oh andlook at unemployment. It's almost all gone, now isn't it. Get real eh.

Over-simplify things, I don't think so. I lived for a year on thatbudget, don't tell me it's simple. It's called making due, and you putoff things you can't afford. I call that incentive to better yourself.Now I pull in a hell of a lot more, and I enjoy it, but I also earnedit. It chokes me when people say I got it good because others have itbad, because it's bollix. ANYONE can pull themselves up and do better,and those that can't we have more than generous programs to help outwith. I don't think anyone is hard done by here, who isn't gettingexactly what they put into it.

Again, "fair" isn't a good goal, "just" is.

Post by Tom2TecLOL, thirty percent of the people in Alberta make minimium wage andthe numbers are rising. Of course, that's of no concern. So much forprogress.

Got a source?

Post by Tom2TecSure, minimum wage, in real dollars has been dropping for thirtyyears. Oh and look at unemployment. It's almost all gone, now isn'tit. Get real eh.

Raise the minimum wage then, just be prepared for the increase inunemployment. History has shown over, and over, that minimum wageincreases are followed by unemployment increases.

PS. your quoting with the pipe (|) really screws up responding. Youreally should switch it back to the standard (>).

Post by Pham NuwenOver-simplify things, I don't think so. I lived for a year on thatbudget, don't tell me it's simple. It's called making due, and you putoff things you can't afford. I call that incentive to better yourself.Now I pull in a hell of a lot more, and I enjoy it, but I also earnedit. It chokes me when people say I got it good because others have itbad, because it's bollix. ANYONE can pull themselves up and do better,and those that can't we have more than generous programs to help outwith. I don't think anyone is hard done by here, who isn't gettingexactly what they put into it.

That was then, this is now. It's gotten worse, of course, you may simply nothave noticed. Yes, having to live close to the edge will sharpen almosteveryone. Unfortunately, not everyone possesses the same abilities, advantages,depth of character, experience or good health. You assume too much when youassume that everyone is as capable as you are or were. Generous programs? LOL,not in Alberta, the PC's gutted every social support program we had. Sure, itfostered more self reliance, but at the cost of many cast aside lives. Ofcourse, you'd like to believe that everyone gets what they deserve because thatfeeds your sense of self worth. However, personally I believe thats simply acommon, convenient, easy and popular rationalization. Perhaps you still havework to do? Or do you believe you're already perfect?

You assume too much when you assume that everyone is as capable asyou are or were.

Short of physical/mental disabilities they are.

Generous programs? LOL, not in Alberta, the PC's gutted every socialsupport program we had.

Bollix. Christ, they cut 5% for 3 years back in 96, since then everyyear every program you can name has typically ended up with biggerbudgets. Go ahead pick a program, and we'll see ho they have done overthe last 10 years. Tom there is a lot of retoric out there that justdoesn't add up. When I worked at CHR we kept hearing from the nursesabout how the "cuts" were killing health care, however every year I wasthere I got a 3% "cost of living" raise PLUS any other raise I earned.Every year the CHR budget grew $700M, $800M, $850M, $900M, $1B, $1.2B,this year I hear they are projecting it at $1.5B+. The numbers justdon't match the rhetoric IMHO.

Of course, you'd like to believe that everyone gets what they deservebecause that feeds your sense of self worth. However, personally Ibelieve thats simply a common, convenient, easy and popularrationalization. Perhaps you still have work to do? Or do you believeyou're already perfect?

No one is perfect. Life is a matter of struggle, those who don't die.

Not off hand, I'll look for that info and post it when I can recallwhere I saw it. In the interm, we'll put that aside if you like.

Sure, I think the 30% is WAY too high to be believable though.

Post by Pham NuwenRaise the minimum wage then, just be prepared for the increase inunemployment. History has shown over, and over, that minimum wageincreases are followed by unemployment increases.

Got a source? <grin> Actually, as wages rise, so does overallprosperity. That seems unarguable, no?

Only if the wages rise naturally, otherwise you typically lose any wagegain in inflation, and unemployement.

Post by Pham NuwenSo let's call it $626/m or just to be conservative $600/m$400 rent inc. water and electric(don't tell me it can't be done causethat is bollix)$100 food (again don't tell me it can't be done)$30 phone$20 mad money (a pint of beer at the pub each week)$50 savings/debt paymentAnd that is a fairly worst case scenario.

While it might be possible to live on that little money for shortperiods of time, it doesn't work on the scale of the minimumwage population. $100 per month for food is not enough to stayhealthy, and there aren't enough places with rent that low forall the people making minimum wage. You'd have to make themshare apartments, or better yet keep them in labor camps.

It includes a thanksgiving dinner, and more than enough food to last thebetter part of two weeks. If I wanted to stretch my dollar further itcertainly would be possible. The problem most people run into is theybuy into junk food too easily. Contrary to popular belief junk food isan expensive luxury, it is far cheaper to eat a balanced diet.

Post by Dr. Fred Mbogoand there aren't enough places with rent that low for all the peoplemaking minimum wage. You'd have to make them share apartments,

<sarcasm>Boo Hoo, Having your own seaside apartment isn't an option for theaverage unskilled worker, what ever will we do?</sarcasm>

Post by Dr. Fred Mbogoand there aren't enough places with rent that low for all the peoplemaking minimum wage. You'd have to make them share apartments,

<sarcasm>Boo Hoo, Having your own seaside apartment isn't an option for theaverage unskilled worker, what ever will we do?</sarcasm>

That's for sure; the easiest way to cut living expenses is to split the rentwith roomies. After my wife and I bought our first house we rented out much ofit on a 'shared accomodation' basis. It meant we couldn't buy nice furniture(the tenants don't generally take care of stuff that isn't their own) and we hadto put up with the noise and occasional other annoyances.

However, we paid off our mortgage in 8 years at a time when interest rates were17 1/2 and 15 3/4 for the second and first mortgages (respectively). Once we hadthe mortgages beaten into submission we cut back on the number of renters,naturally, and once we had paid them all down we stopped renting out. It's alifestyle and an economic choice, that's all.

At one point we had 5 renters and three dogs, plus ourselves, living in a 1050square foot bungalow. If we could put up with it, I don't see why anyone elsecan't.

You've got to respect those who get ahead because they work both hard and smart.If only more people were so together. I think though, that most people aren't asable or as intelligent as you and Glenn. Remember, a lot of money is spent tomake sure people make the wrong choices. As well, they don't really try to teachthinking in school. As well, some parents mess up their kids pretty bad. Sure,most people deserve what they get, but not everyone. Some people just seem tohave shit luck sometimes. Furthermore, there are a lot of dishonest companiesand people out there who are quite good at ripping people off.

Post by GlennMor <>At one point we had 5 renters and three dogs, plus ourselves, living ina 1050 square foot bungalow. If we could put up with it, I don't see whyanyone else can't.

Because other people aren't like you? I for one hate humans and don't trustthem. There are very, very few people I could tolerate sharing space with.I think everyone should be able to live alone if they want to.

I shop Safeway mostly because it is a block away. I rarely buy meatthere unless it is a real good deal, or I need something specific. Ifind it has the best produce, and bakery though. IGA I hit every otherweek, and it is good for sales, but I definately don't like their meat,or produce. Costco is the king for bulk things in my house (well worththe yearly $50 fee) pop, meat, frozen food, bulk cans of stuff, etc...all from Costco.

Yah, that only makes cents. ;-} I know a guy who'd drive ten miles to save tencents. But hey, wtf is with that $50 Costco fee? I'd shop there if it wasn't forexactly that reason. Thank goodness there's no such foolishness at that GreatCanadian place. Of course, they do do their own stupid management tricks.

While we're on this subject, can anyone explain why every store sucks at havingenough open tills? I wish I was paid for all the time I wasted waiting in lineups. Of course, I foolishly always pick the short line which always takes thefreakin longest. On that note, why can't they have an express lane that reallyis? Like how about one for people with just one or two things?

Post by Tom2TecBut hey, wtf is with that $50 Costco fee? I'd shop there if it wasn'tfor exactly that reason. Thank goodness there's no such foolishnessat that Great Canadian place. Of course, they do do their own stupidmanagement tricks.

I save that $50 in 2 months or less typically. Besides I saved enough onone purchase there a few years ago that I could buy that membership forthe next 40 years and still end up ahead.

Post by Tom2TecWhile we're on this subject, can anyone explain why every store sucksat having enough open tills? I wish I was paid for all the time Iwasted waiting in line ups. Of course, I foolishly always pick theshort line which always takes the freakin longest. On that note, whycan't they have an express lane that really is? Like how about onefor people with just one or two things?2tec ~ prefers wasted time to time wasted

But if you want fast service, then the best way is to remove the cashierand replace them with electronic systems. Aren't you worried about allthe poor minimum wage earners you would lay off? =8)

Post by Pham NuwenBut if you want fast service, then the best way is to remove the cashierand replace them with electronic systems. Aren't you worried about allthe poor minimum wage earners you would lay off? =8)

There are actually a number of stores now doing exactly this. I don'trecall seeing any here in Calgary, but I spent the first 6 months of theyear in Toronto, and virtually ever store I went to had them. Work like ahot damn if you ask me.

It is if you are smart about it. It may not be the Atkins diet, but itIt includes a thanksgiving dinner, and more than enough food to last thebetter part of two weeks.

I doubt that. There's hardly any protein in there at all. The turkey isgood for two or three meals and the ham for another four. That leavesyou with the cheese and eggs, which aren't much on their own.

Also, I think you're underestimating what you actually eat. If you boughttwice that order and ate nothing else, I think you'd find yourselfliving off mustard by the end of the month. :)

You are right it is proctonumerology. Both you and Tom are WAY OFF onthis one.

First unskilled/menial != minimum wage, Second.....

http://makeashorterlink.com/?B53A51F26

Post by Dr. Fred MbogoAbout 33,000 Albertans are working for minimum wage - about 2% of thelabor force - and just under half of those work in the hospitalityindustry, the committee heard.

This in 1998 when it was $5/h and unemployment was about 5.8%.

http://makeashorterlink.com/?P14A51F26

Post by Dr. Fred MbogoMason released information showing that 140,900 Albertans earn lessthan $8.00 per hour. This represents more than 8 per cent ofAlberta’s employed labour force. In addition to the 16,100 Albertansmaking less than $5.99/hour, there are an additional 53,700Albertans making $6.99/hour or less, and yet another 71,100 making$7.99/hour or less. He said the province’s Human Resources andEmployment Ministry compiled the numbers from Statistics CanadaLabour Force Surveys.

This in 2003 when it is $5.90/h and unemployment is about 5.0%. 16,100people represents approximately 0.5% of the population.

Take special note of the huge spike just starting in July 1999 and thenthe slow slide down toward Nov 1999. That spike is the direct effect ofthe minimum wage increase in Oct 1999 from $5.00 - $5.90. Now otherfactors conspired (OPEC & Y2K) to make that not so bad a time to raiseit, as the price of oil shot up and unemployment was greatly reduced.

It is if you are smart about it. It may not be the Atkins diet, butIt includes a thanksgiving dinner, and more than enough food tolast the better part of two weeks.

I doubt that. There's hardly any protein in there at all. The turkeyis good for two or three meals and the ham for another four. Thatleaves you with the cheese and eggs, which aren't much on their own.

The Ham was sliced into 14 portions quite easily, and each portion ismore than enough for a meal. The Turkey is 3 portions. You also missedthe 6 cans of Beans. for an extra $2.20 I could have gotten a pack of 20large hot dogs. Both the Ham, and Turkey are luxury items relativelyspeaking, that Ham can actually be had cheaper as processed ham, asopposed to a real ham like I bought, the Turkey was a special item. Icould have bought a Kg of ground beef for the same price and gotten 6meals at least out of that.

What I eat is far more than what I need to eat. We do tend to begluttons here in North America. Granted I love food, but I have, andcould if necessary keep myself on far less than I do. Hell it would behealthy if I did compared to what I do eat.

Post by Dr. Fred MbogoIf you bought twice that order and ate nothing else, I think you'dfind yourself living off mustard by the end of the month. :)

You ignore the fact that many people may have "minimium wage" jobs while stillbeing very skilled. Many people have to work at whatever they can at some pointin their lives. Sadly, for whatever reason, some people never manage to riseabove this. For you to lay the entire blame for that upon those individuals issimply a generalization and evasion, no matter how you cut it.

Yes, and in 1998, $5.00 was worth more than the current wage. In fact, if we goall the way back to 1953, $5.00 would be worth $37.21 today. Granted, theminimium wage was lower then, if there was one? Does anyone know where to find areference to historical mininimium wage levels? I'd like to se a comparison inreal dollars.

www.bankofcanada.ca/en/inflation_calc.htm

As for the number of people earning minimium wage exactly, I think low incomelevels is a more accepted perspective.

www.statcan.ca/english/Pgdb/famil60c.htm

Post by Pham NuwenThis in 2003 when it is $5.90/h and unemployment is about 5.0%. 16,100people represents approximately 0.5% of the population.

Yes, and on that same page it also says that the "Incidence of low income %" inAlberta was 13.8% in 2000.

Post by Pham NuwenTake special note of the huge spike just starting in July 1999 and thenthe slow slide down toward Nov 1999. That spike is the direct effect ofthe minimum wage increase in Oct 1999 from $5.00 - $5.90. Now otherfactors conspired (OPEC & Y2K) to make that not so bad a time to raiseit, as the price of oil shot up and unemployment was greatly reduced.

You assume it's the direct effect. Can you prove it? Personally, I remainunconvinced. The truth is it's evident to me that we would be much better off ifwages had even just kept pace with prices let alone, actually risen faster thanprices.

No matter how you spin it, the facts are clear. Income is rising for the top fewand falling for the rest.

You ignore the fact that many people may have "minimium wage" jobswhile still being very skilled.

I never said otherwise.

Post by Tom2TecMany people have to work at whatever they can at some point in theirlives. Sadly, for whatever reason, some people never manage to riseabove this. For you to lay the entire blame for that upon thoseindividuals is simply a generalization and evasion, no matter how youcut it.

A generalization yes, again I never said otherwise, and I believe acorrect one. "evasion" however, what am I evading?

Post by Tom2TecYes, and in 1998, $5.00 was worth more than the current wage. Infact, if we go all the way back to 1953, $5.00 would be worth $37.21today. Granted, the minimium wage was lower then, if there was one?Does anyone know where to find a reference to historical mininimiumwage levels? I'd like to se a comparison in real dollars.

Post by Pham NuwenThis in 2003 when it is $5.90/h and unemployment is about 5.0%.16,100 people represents approximately 0.5% of the population.

Yes, and on that same page it also says that the "Incidence of lowincome %" in Alberta was 13.8% in 2000.

A completely construed statistic if you look at the notes. lies, damnlies, and statistics. If a stat has to be "arbitrarily estimated" and"adjusted", one has to wonder how honest they are, and what they areactually measuring.

Post by Tom2TecThe truth is it's evident to me that we would be much better off ifwages had even just kept pace with prices let alone, actually risenfaster than prices.

I agree, what you have to ask yourself is why wages haven't risen. Ithink that is obvious, because of state interference in the free marketsystem, through regulations, duties, taxes, and licensing.

Post by Tom2TecNo matter how you spin it, the facts are clear. Income is rising forthe top few and falling for the rest.

Post by Tom2TecYup, and as a vegetarian, I can personally attest to the fact thateating meat is a choice, not a necessity. It also lowered my food billconsiderably and I believe I'm healthier because of it.

Good for you. In my case though, the Caveman diet - eliminating carbsand eating mostly meat, and using protein for energy instead of carbs - isthe only thing that has ever enabled me to lose weight and keep it off.It's especially nice because I love eating tasty animals, but finding non-boring ways to cook them is a problem.

Post by Dr. Fred MbogoNow try finding 16,100 apartments for $400 or less per month in Alberta,with a distribution matching that of the population. Can't be done.

"$400.00/month utilities included"there is one down, I expect the other 16099 would be just as easy. Thereis no housing shortage.

You're just saying that because you're not only lucky enough to have founda low-rent place years ago and kept it low, but also you're sharing it.I think if you had to move you'd have a hard time finding something with acomparable price/quality/convenience tradeoff.

Post by Dr. Fred MbogoYou're just saying that because you're not only lucky enough to havefound a low-rent place years ago and kept it low, but also you'resharing it. I think if you had to move you'd have a hard time findingsomething with a comparable price/quality/convenience tradeoff.

It is if you are smart about it. It may not be the Atkins diet, but itNoodles 1kg = $2.00Beans (6) = $4.20Bread (2) = $2.00soup (12) = $10.80Ham 1kg = $10.00Cheese = $8.80eggs = $2.00vegtables 1kg = $4.00turkey .5kg = $5.00stuffing = $1.00Tax = $3.50========================Total = $53.30It includes a thanksgiving dinner, and more than enough food to last thebetter part of two weeks. If I wanted to stretch my dollar further itcertainly would be possible. The problem most people run into is theybuy into junk food too easily. Contrary to popular belief junk food isan expensive luxury, it is far cheaper to eat a balanced diet.

Thanks for the math Pham. BTW, you don't pay tax on fooditems like these. Perhaps this is hypothetical, I thinkmaybe it is. Did you drive to Safeway? Let's figure outcab fare. And why are you shopping at Safeway, the 7-11 ofsupermarkets? Perhaps because price does not matteranymore? Then there are things like laundry soap, bus fare,milk, juice, children and other sundry items that youoverlook in your minimum wage lifestyle calculation.

Thanks for the math Pham. BTW, you don't pay tax on food items likethese. Perhaps this is hypothetical, I think maybe it is.

Ah right you are, my goof I calculated the tax, but the tax was on otheritems I bought but didn't list for the purpose of this exercise. Thankyou for stretching the minimum wage earners dollars by an extra $3.50,he can use that to buy a beer at the pub.

Did you drive to Safeway?

Only because I was coming from work, If I had been at home, I'd walk. Itonly two blocks.

Let's figure out cab fare.

Why? why the fuck do you need a cab to carry 4 bags of groceries, acouple of blocks? Note, I used to carry 8 bags 16 blocks in the dead ofwinter from the CO-OP to where I was living at the time. If your onminimum wage suck it up, and make due. If you waste your money on cabsand things, of course you aren't going to be able to make ends meet.

And why are you shopping at Safeway, the 7-11 of supermarkets?Perhaps because price does not matter anymore?

It's close, I find the prices very comparable, and IMHO it has the bestproduce.

Then there are things like laundry soap,

One time cost every 3 months, you work it into your budget.

bus fare

I though you were taking cabs? Again work it into your budget. If youare working for minimum wage though I'd ask what you are doing workingso far away it requires a bus.

, milk, juice,

Don't drink milk (lactose intolerant), as for juice again work it in.It's not hard you just have to make choices.

children and other sundry items that you overlook in your minimumwage lifestyle calculation.

If you have Kids your eligible for programs to help out with that, andone would think that both parents aren't on minimum wage.

And sorry, I don't like the 99 cent loaves of bread.

(Well I do) But if you are on minimum wage you have a choice, you cansuck it up and eat 99 cent bread, or you can eat cake.

Thanks for the math Pham. BTW, you don't pay tax on food items likethese. Perhaps this is hypothetical, I think maybe it is.

Ah right you are, my goof I calculated the tax, but the tax was on otheritems I bought but didn't list for the purpose of this exercise. Thankyou for stretching the minimum wage earners dollars by an extra $3.50,he can use that to buy a beer at the pub.

Did you drive to Safeway?

Only because I was coming from work, If I had been at home, I'd walk. Itonly two blocks.

Let's figure out cab fare.

Why? why the fuck do you need a cab to carry 4 bags of groceries, acouple of blocks? Note, I used to carry 8 bags 16 blocks in the dead ofwinter from the CO-OP to where I was living at the time. If your onminimum wage suck it up, and make due. If you waste your money on cabsand things, of course you aren't going to be able to make ends meet.

at least you had a coop.. we lived in a swamp and had to get ourgroceries from a tree .. 22 BLOCKS.. where a giant lived

Thanks for the math Pham. BTW, you don't pay tax on food items likethese. Perhaps this is hypothetical, I think maybe it is.

Ah right you are, my goof I calculated the tax, but the tax was on otheritems I bought but didn't list for the purpose of this exercise. Thankyou for stretching the minimum wage earners dollars by an extra $3.50,he can use that to buy a beer at the pub.

Did you drive to Safeway?

Only because I was coming from work, If I had been at home, I'd walk. Itonly two blocks.

Let's figure out cab fare.

Why? why the fuck do you need a cab to carry 4 bags of groceries, acouple of blocks?

Hey asshole, I'm not the one who drives his car to work. Iguess everybody (in Pham's world) lives a couple of blocksfrom Safeway. Sheesh, how stupid of me.

Post by Pham NuwenWhy? why the fuck do you need a cab to carry 4 bags of groceries, acouple of blocks?

Hey asshole, I'm not the one who drives his car to work. I guesseverybody (in Pham's world) lives a couple of blocks from Safeway.Sheesh, how stupid of me.

Holy take things personal. Look I don't earn minimum wage, I paid mydues. When I did earn minimum wage, I didn't have a car, I rode a bike,and I shared my apartment, and I made the sacrifices to get ahead. Why?So I don't have to do it now. I can enjoy my nice car, and spend morethan $25 a week on food. But don't tell me it can't be done, because Ihave been there and done that.

Post by Pham NuwenNote, I used to carry 8 bags 16 blocks in the dead of winter fromthe CO-OP to where I was living at the time.

Eight bags of what? Popcorn? I would have trouble carrying eightbags of normal groceries to my car. Maybe that makes me a fat lazybastard.

Maybe it does, that is up to you to decide.

Those who can waste their money at Safeway should not talk aboutwasting money on cabs.

Well that is a non sequitur if I ever heard one. Like I said, I don'tearn minimum wage. I'll tell you if I did, I wouldn't be riding aroundin taxi cabs.

Post by Pham NuwenIf you have Kids your eligible for programs to help out with that,and one would think that both parents aren't on minimum wage.

(Well I do) But if you are on minimum wage you have a choice, youcan suck it up and eat 99 cent bread, or you can eat cake.

So maybe you like the cheap loaves that have no flavour and marginalnutrition. I like the multigrains, stonegrounds, etc. Better valuefor the money.But there is little point in discussing value when one is obsessedwith cost. If 99 cents is good enough for you, well then, thatshould be good enough for everybody!

It's called choices. No one owes you a better loaf of bread, you wantit, then EARN it.

MadRedHatter <***@mee.com> wrote in message news:%93hb.51130$***@pd7tw3no...

| Or what you could have done is called them BEFORE you got the cut off| notice. Let them know you would be late with your payment.

| Why do people always cry foul when they let their bills go unpaid for awhile| then get services cutoff? I have been in situations where I couldn't make| bill payments because of a loss of employment. Know what the first thing I| did was? I called my landlord and asked for an extension. I called my| utilities and asked the same thing. And guess what .. they were quite happy| I came to them beforehand. I was late with everything but was able to| catchup within a month. No interuption in service. No eviction.

While I agree that calling Enmax earlier would have, perhaps, avoideddisconnection as you suggested, you also avoided several of the original issues.As well there are other considerations. How about addressing these pointdirectly?

1) He did call and he did make arrangement, which Enmax didn't keep.2) They cut people off without trying to phone or contact them at the time.3) They charge people who are already in fiscal trouble4) They charge people too much in general, ie. millions in profits5) They demand a deposit BEFORE reconnection6) They don't accept credit card payments7) They charge people to reconnect8) They charge fees (penalties) in addition to disconnect, reconnect and depositcosts9) They seem to deliberately try to disconnect people in order to generate extrarevenue10) They are the least accommodating of the four public utilities11) They only accept payments with faxed proof, even if you don't have a fax oreven a phone12) They refuse to connect you with a supervisor13) They refuse to negotiate in any way at that point14) You cannot pay the guy when he comes to disconnect you15) They will not accept partial payments16) The "Enmax Customer Advocates" don't return your calls17) The bills have been getting higher and higher for years now18) They are no longer responsive or accountable to your alderman's inquiries19) They come across as arrogant, demanding, uncaring and unsympathetic20) The top guy doubled his salary to 600K over the last three years21) They could limit your power consumption instead of cutting you offcompletely22) A court has already said that the penalties they used to charge were illegalyet the new fees that replaced them are even higher, of course, theyr'e notcalled the same

I've spoken with every level of management at Enmax recently and I can speakfrom personal experience. I believe that the upper management at Enmax aresimply in self serving denial. They believe that all of their policies arejustified and they don't see any need to change anything. They also don't feelthat the public has the right to question what they consider is private businesspolicy. They also think that cutting of customers in such a manner is effectiveand conscientious customer service. I know this because I've questioned thesepolicies and procedures directly with the person who is in charge ofimplementing them. He is absolutely convinced he's fully justified in treatingpeople in the way he sees fit without needing to consider any alternatives.

This is, in my opinion, abuse of power and irresponsibility at the very least.Of course, it's also toeing a hard line and inhumane. It all stems from thebelief that people who are disconnected are trying to cheat or steal from Enmax.Nothing could be further from the truth. The large majority of people in thisposition are just either going temporarily through bad times or are simplyincompetent when it comes to crisis or financial management. I'm in no waynegating their responsibilities, however, I expect Enmax to be even moreresponsible and find a less abusing method of seeking overdue payments. Theirmain argument always comes down to cost. They, of course, overlook the largersocial costs to those who are the least able to afford additional trouble andexpense. They don't care about people as much as they care about profits. Isthis a good and responsible position? I personally don't believe so. Certainlynot one that deserves double someone's already extremely high salary. Of course,City Hall doesn't care about my perspective. I've heard Enmax is consideringputting in a system to phone people before disconnection. So, with all duerespect, they are trying to address one of the concerns I brought up here.However, they have a long way to go and to me it seems like they've been goingin the wrong direction.

You know, you talk a lot about responsibility. I'd like to hear what you have tosay about their responsibilities rather than always talking about ours. Afterall we pay them to be responsible, on the other hand we don't get paid to beresponsible. We're penalized when we don't conform to their policies, which, ofcourse, we have little or no real say in. My main point is, and remains, thatour bills should be getting LESS expensive and our wages should be INCREASING.Otherwise, these people shouldn't be giving themselves raises. Which is why Ibelieve that Ms. AL said, "The rich (corporations) get richer and the poor getpoorer". See?

2tec ~ grew up watching Underdog

PS, Yes Glen, I thought about your comments too, so, please feel free toconsider this a response to you as well. By the way, thanks for yourperspectives.

Post by Tom2Tec| Or what you could have done is called them BEFORE you got the cut off| notice. Let them know you would be late with your payment.| Why do people always cry foul when they let their bills go unpaid for awhile| then get services cutoff? I have been in situations where I couldn't make| bill payments because of a loss of employment. Know what the first thing I| did was? I called my landlord and asked for an extension. I called my| utilities and asked the same thing. And guess what .. they were quite happy| I came to them beforehand. I was late with everything but was able to| catchup within a month. No interuption in service. No eviction.While I agree that calling Enmax earlier would have, perhaps, avoideddisconnection as you suggested, you also avoided several of the original issues.As well there are other considerations. How about addressing these pointdirectly?1) He did call and he did make arrangement, which Enmax didn't keep.

Only after his account went delinquent.

Post by Tom2Tec2) They cut people off without trying to phone or contact them at the time.

Bullcrap .. I have friends who are always late with their bills andconstantly get notices in the mail.

Is it Enmax's job to determine who is in fiscal trouble and who isn't? Can Icall up Shaw and tell them to stop charging me because I am in "fiscaltrouble"? Of course not .. Enmax provided a service and they expect to bepaid.

Post by Tom2Tec4) They charge people too much in general, ie. millions in profits

Welcome to capitalism 101. Businesses are in existance to make money. Didthe OP do anything to reduce his power consumption? Was he living outsidehis means?

Post by Tom2Tec8) They charge fees (penalties) in addition to disconnect, reconnect and depositcosts

Don't default on payments and you'll never see these fees.

Post by Tom2Tec9) They seem to deliberately try to disconnect people in order to generate extrarevenue

I have never heard of a customer who pays their bills on time ever gettingdisconnected and charged for reconnection. Funny how it works that way.

Post by Tom2Tec10) They are the least accommodating of the four public utilities

You know how many times I have had to contact Enmax in the last 3 years?Twice ... once to get power turned on in my old place and another time whenI moved. Both times the CSR were very friendly and my power was hooked upwhen promised.

Post by Tom2Tec11) They only accept payments with faxed proof, even if you don't have a fax oreven a phone

Can you blame them? How else would you suggest they get proof? As far ashaving to fax ... Mailboxes Etc.

Post by Tom2Tec17) The bills have been getting higher and higher for years now

So is the cost of mustard. It's known as inflation.

Post by Tom2Tec18) They are no longer responsive or accountable to your alderman's inquiries

Can't comment on this.

Post by Tom2Tec19) They come across as arrogant, demanding, uncaring and unsympathetic

To delinquent accounts they probably are. To responsible people they arequite friendly and accomidating.

Post by Tom2Tec20) The top guy doubled his salary to 600K over the last three years

And ...? What's your point?

Post by Tom2Tec21) They could limit your power consumption instead of cutting you offcompletely

How can they limit your power? No power between certain hours? I am surepeople would be pissed to have their freezer full of food spoiling. Cut thepower by 50%? Wouldn't this play havoc on any electrical device you have?

Post by Tom2Tec22) A court has already said that the penalties they used to charge were illegalyet the new fees that replaced them are even higher, of course, theyr'e notcalled the same

I hadn't heard this. Got any citations?

Post by Tom2TecI've spoken with every level of management at Enmax recently and I can speakfrom personal experience. I believe that the upper management at Enmax aresimply in self serving denial. They believe that all of their policies arejustified and they don't see any need to change anything. They also don't feelthat the public has the right to question what they consider is private businesspolicy. They also think that cutting of customers in such a manner is effectiveand conscientious customer service. I know this because I've questioned thesepolicies and procedures directly with the person who is in charge ofimplementing them. He is absolutely convinced he's fully justified in treatingpeople in the way he sees fit without needing to consider any

alternatives.

Might I ask what circumstances forced you to speak with every level ofmanagement? Except for the two times (as I mentioned above) I have never hadto contact anyone at Enmax.

Post by Tom2TecThis is, in my opinion, abuse of power and irresponsibility at the very least.Of course, it's also toeing a hard line and inhumane. It all stems from thebelief that people who are disconnected are trying to cheat or steal from Enmax.Nothing could be further from the truth. The large majority of people in thisposition are just either going temporarily through bad times or are simplyincompetent when it comes to crisis or financial management. I'm in no waynegating their responsibilities, however, I expect Enmax to be even moreresponsible and find a less abusing method of seeking overdue payments. Theirmain argument always comes down to cost. They, of course, overlook the largersocial costs to those who are the least able to afford additional trouble andexpense. They don't care about people as much as they care about profits. Isthis a good and responsible position? I personally don't believe so.

Why should Enmax be responsible for people who can't manage money? Do youthink Visa would be all "Aww shucks mister .. you spent all your money onbeer and smokes and can't pay us? That's all right, you can catch us nexttime."

Can you imagine how many people are late with their bills or don't pay atall? Enmax has bills of their own to pay as well. If you ran a business andprovided a service would you take the excuse of not being able to balanceyour checkbook from your customers?

Post by Tom2TecCertainlynot one that deserves double someone's already extremely high salary. Of course,City Hall doesn't care about my perspective. I've heard Enmax is consideringputting in a system to phone people before disconnection. So, with all duerespect, they are trying to address one of the concerns I brought up here.However, they have a long way to go and to me it seems like they've been goingin the wrong direction.You know, you talk a lot about responsibility. I'd like to hear what you have tosay about their responsibilities rather than always talking about ours. Afterall we pay them to be responsible, on the other hand we don't get paid to beresponsible. We're penalized when we don't conform to their policies, which, ofcourse, we have little or no real say in. My main point is, and remains, thatour bills should be getting LESS expensive and our wages should be INCREASING.Otherwise, these people shouldn't be giving themselves raises. Which is why Ibelieve that Ms. AL said, "The rich (corporations) get richer and the poor getpoorer". See?

Enmax's responsibility? As I see it they need to provide me with electricity24/7. And I have always received that from them. (of course with theexception of interruptions out of their control .. ie: weather). They arenot there to cut the little guy some slack. They are there to make money.They area business.

What basis do you have to make the comment "our bills should be getting LESSexpensive "? Should a company stop making money after a certain point?

"We're penalized when we don't conform to their policies"?? Well duh! Whatgood would policies be if there were no penalties for breaking them?

Bottom line is if you are responsible with your bills, live within yourmeans and take measures before your account becomes delinquent you won'thave any problems.

MadRedHatter <***@mee.com> wrote in message news:51ohb.57379$***@pd7tw3no...

| Only after his account went delinquent.

So what, they still can't try to work it out. After all, he did try to resolvethe situation by calling them. Of course, he tried to be responsible, but, heh,they don't need to try. Sure.

| > 2) They cut people off without trying to phone or contact them at the| time.|| Bullcrap .. I have friends who are always late with their bills and| constantly get notices in the mail.

They have your phone number, they can't call it? But hey, they can send someoneto make sure the get thier $65. Yup, such care, such concern, suchprofessionalism. We should be really proud of how our City treats people whenthey're down.

| > 3) They charge people who are already in fiscal trouble|| Is it Enmax's job to determine who is in fiscal trouble and who isn't? Can I| call up Shaw and tell them to stop charging me because I am in "fiscal| trouble"? Of course not .. Enmax provided a service and they expect to be| paid.

Sheesh, no one suggested not paying at all. Would it hurt to defer some part ofthe bill for some time? Or set up a budget? Or not charge such high fees? Or, atleast, try to be less avaricious, demanding and inflexible?

| > 4) They charge people too much in general, ie. millions in profits|| Welcome to capitalism 101. Businesses are in existance to make money. Did| the OP do anything to reduce his power consumption? Was he living outside| his means?

Capitalism, ROTFLMAO ... corruption is more like it. Oh my, are you naive.

| > 5) They demand a deposit BEFORE reconnection|| Can you blame them? They are taking the risk of reconnecting someone with a| history of not paying.

Yes, yes I can. What risk? People will be back, everyone needs power. Besides,there's collection agencies and other avenues. Besides, why is the deposit soneedlessly high. It's just another penalty, in my opinion

| > 6) They don't accept credit card payments|| I can't comment on this as I pay all my bills online. But if I recall can't| you pay your bills at the most banks? This guy was unemployed .. spend $2| and take a bus to Enmax.

No, they want you to pay cash and they want you to do it a city hall duringoffice hours.

| > 7) They charge people to reconnect|| Yeah .... so?

Yup, that helps the situation. Thiers anyways.

Post by Tom2Tec8) They charge fees (penalties) in addition to disconnect, reconnect and

| deposit| > costs|| Don't default on payments and you'll never see these fees.

Duh, yup must be nice to be always affluent. How is perfection?

| > 9) They seem to deliberately try to disconnect people in order to generate| extra| > revenue|| I have never heard of a customer who pays their bills on time ever getting| disconnected and charged for reconnection. Funny how it works that way.

See above. Boy, for a perfect person, you're not very compassionate, caring,concerned, humane, kind, or understanding, are you?

| > 10) They are the least accommodating of the four public utilities|| You know how many times I have had to contact Enmax in the last 3 years?| Twice ... once to get power turned on in my old place and another time when| I moved. Both times the CSR were very friendly and my power was hooked up| when promised.

Yup, that makes it all ok alright. Now if only everyone was perfect.

| > 11) They only accept payments with faxed proof, even if you don't have a| fax or| > even a phone|| Can you blame them? How else would you suggest they get proof? As far as| having to fax ... Mailboxes Etc.

Yes, remember, the issue here is what happens when people are broke. Oh, hey, Ithought you were perfect, did you overlook something? Awww ..

| > 12) They refuse to connect you with a supervisor|| Never tried to so I can't comment.

So you say nothing?

| > 13) They refuse to negotiate in any way at that point|| Bull! As I stated before I had to call them when I was unemployed and| negotiated a payment plan so my power didn't get cut off. But I did this| BEFORE the payment was late.

On this I agree, he should have called earlier. However, many poor people aresimply not as on the ball as you. Enmax needs to deal with all people. Theycannot expect not to have some people who aren't as competent as others. It'stheir responsibility to deal with us. Not our responsibility to be perfect.

| > 14) You cannot pay the guy when he comes to disconnect you|| Aren't those guys sub-contractors? Or am I thinking Shaw?

| > 17) The bills have been getting higher and higher for years now|| So is the cost of mustard. It's known as inflation.

LOL, Enmax's bills, fees and penalties have risen far faster than inflation. Ashave their salaries. That is the problem.|| > 18) They are no longer responsive or accountable to your alderman's| inquiries|| Can't comment on this.

Of course, nothing to say eh. Fiqures.

| > 19) They come across as arrogant, demanding, uncaring and unsympathetic|| To delinquent accounts they probably are. To responsible people they are| quite friendly and accomidating.

Boy, and I bet that helps. Oh, and it's justified. Everbody knows how useful itis to beat a dying dead or dying horse.

| > 20) The top guy doubled his salary to 600K over the last three years|| And ...? What's your point?

Duh.

Enmax 'efforts' well paid byDon Braid For The Calgary Herald Friday, October 03,2003

"Enmax CEO Bob Nicolay earned $698,468 in 2002, well over twice his totalcompensation only two years earlier, when he was paid $340,015. In 2001, Nicolayand other senior Enmax officials also received large extra payments for "specialefforts" in preparing the taxpayer-owned utility for private sale, although itwas never sold. Nicolay got $148,606 in 2001 under the heading "all othercompensation," which includes both the sale efforts and pension entitlementspaid for him by the company. Nicolay's total pay in 2002 certainly vaults him tothe top of the list for Calgary bosses of publicly-owned enterprises. Jack Davismade $520,000 heading the Calgary Health Region. Dale Stanway, the city's CEO,earned about $233,000. Nonetheless, Enmax doesn't seem to think facts aboutexecutive pay are news. I do believe they're news, partly because Enmax wants toget rid of 200 jobs, and is applying to charge customers 11 per cent more forelectricity. This seems to be the wonderful world of deregulation as it appliesto a city-owned utility; higher rates for consumers, higher pay for topexecutives and fewer jobs for employees further down the ladder. Nicolay's pay,and that of other senior officials, is studied annually by a committee andapproved by the board, which includes two aldermen (currently, Dale Hodges andBob Hawkesworth.) The salaries were disclosed through a regulatory filing inJuly, but Enmax sure didn't fire off any press releases. One thing is certain:the taxpayers, as indirect owners, have every right to know all the details, andto ask what we're getting for such whopping salaries at the top. The company ismaking more money -- profits went from $44 million in 1999 to $249 million twoyears later. As much as $50 million of that comes back into city coffers as adividend that can be used for roads, services or to help keep down taxes. Butit's fascinating to compare Enmax with Edmonton's Epcor, also taxpayer-owned,which holds $4.7 billion in assets compared to $1.2 billion for Enmax, and makesmore than twice the profits. Don Lowry, Epcor's CEO, made $706,000 in 2002, just$8,000 more than Nicolay. You can hardly blame Nicolay for taking the money. Thequestion is, does Enmax's position as a rather small utility justify suchcompensation? Enmax certainly thinks so. "Compensation is no different at Enmaxthan at most companies," says spokesman Tony McCallum. "It's based on themidpoint of what most companies are paying for similar positions. It's alsobased on individual performance and the company's success at meeting itstargets." The Calgary customer/owner, facing another rate hike, might haveanother view of success, and what these people should be paid. In 2002,Nicolay's earnings of $698,468 were comprised of $390,260 in salary, $230,000 inbonus, $11,400 as "other annual compensation" and $66,808 under the heading "allother compensation." In 2000, his total pay of $340,015 was made up of $225,000in salary, a bonus of $80,000, and $35,015 under the two headings of "othercompensation." Sean Durfy, vice-president of unregulated business, made a totalof $356,175 in 2002, up from $229,715 in 2000. Executive vice-president RandallHenderson, who joined Enmax in 2001, earned $333,662 in 2002. Karen AnnePrentice, vice-president of legal affairs, made $311,997 in 2002, compared to$205,995 in 2000. Customer service vice-president Lori Rae Topp, who has sinceleft Enmax, was paid $294,545 in 2002. She had joined the company in 2001. Theseexecutives saw substantial jumps in their extra pay during 2001, for "one-timecompensation for special efforts rendered during the proposed sale of Enmax." Inthe regulatory sense, this was all properly disclosed. But there was no effortwhatever, either from city hall or the company, to make the public aware of thefacts. For a taxpayer-owned enterprise, that won't do."

| > 21) They could limit your power consumption instead of cutting you off| > completely|| How can they limit your power? No power between certain hours? I am sure| people would be pissed to have their freezer full of food spoiling. Cut the| power by 50%? Wouldn't this play havoc on any electrical device you have?

They have and can use a device that limits wattage. No, no it only means you canonly run one thing at a time. It's an inconvenience, but it allows your furnaceto maintain heat, and your fridge to keep all your food from spoiling. By law,they must use it in the winter. Of course, without the law, I'd bet theywouldn't bother. Face it, they're uncaring and self serving. They don't give ash*t if people freeze or starve,

|| > 22) A court has already said that the penalties they used to charge were| illegal| > yet the new fees that replaced them are even higher, of course, theyr'e| not| > called the same|| I hadn't heard this. Got any citations?

Yup, why can't you do your own research?

Hobsbawn v. Enmax Corporation and The City of Calgary

| > I've spoken with every level of management at Enmax recently and I can| speak| > from personal experience. I believe that the upper management at Enmax are| > simply in self serving denial. They believe that all of their policies are| > justified and they don't see any need to change anything. They also don't| feel| > that the public has the right to question what they consider is private| business| > policy. They also think that cutting of customers in such a manner is| effective| > and conscientious customer service. I know this because I've questioned| these| > policies and procedures directly with the person who is in charge of| > implementing them. He is absolutely convinced he's fully justified in| treating| > people in the way he sees fit without needing to consider any| alternatives.|| Might I ask what circumstances forced you to speak with every level of| management? Except for the two times (as I mentioned above) I have never had| to contact anyone at Enmax.

Sure you can ask. What difference would it make? We weren't discussing myadvocacy.

| Why should Enmax be responsible for people who can't manage money? Do you| think Visa would be all "Aww shucks mister .. you spent all your money on| beer and smokes and can't pay us? That's all right, you can catch us next| time."

Duh, Enmax isn't Visa, it's monopolistic public utility which provides anecessity, that's why they are responsible. Why do I bother explaining this toyou. Obviously you can't get it. IMHO, it appears that you're just not caring ordeep enough or you're too biased. Sad really.

| Can you imagine how many people are late with their bills or don't pay at| all? Enmax has bills of their own to pay as well. If you ran a business and| provided a service would you take the excuse of not being able to balance| your checkbook from your customers?

I have and do run a business. I did and do better, and I didn't and don't expectexcessive compensation. Nor did I have my customers over a barrel.

| Enmax's responsibility? As I see it they need to provide me with electricity| 24/7. And I have always received that from them. (of course with the| exception of interruptions out of their control .. ie: weather). They are| not there to cut the little guy some slack. They are there to make money.| They area business.

No, they don't. Never had a power outage? Ever been compensated? By the way,they aren't a business, they're a utility, and a public one. Get over it. Facefacts. Stop twisting words.

| What basis do you have to make the comment "our bills should be getting LESS| expensive "? Should a company stop making money after a certain point?

See above. It's the same lame and false argument.|| "We're penalized when we don't conform to their policies"?? Well duh! What| good would policies be if there were no penalties for breaking them?|| Bottom line is if you are responsible with your bills, live within your| means and take measures before your account becomes delinquent you won't| have any problems.

Ahh, Mr. The World Is Perfect, so therefore others must be losers attitude.That's just a shallow justification for the mistreatment of others in my view.

2tec ~ thinks bullies are bad.

On December 11th Enmax filed its Regulatory Rate Option with Lethbridge CityCouncil. Included in the rates is a $10.00 per month charge for invoiceprocessing. This appears to be the cost of an envelope and postage. The chargeis excessive and negates half of the monthly rebate provided by the provincialgovernment, guaranteeing that regulated rate option customers in Lethbridge willpay more in 2001 than in 2000. Enmax would not appear to be a company that hasthe customers interests at heart. Customers who choose Enmax may beinadvertently subsidizing the city of Calgary.www.iasa.ca/ED_documents_IASA/Issue09.html

Post by Tom2Tec| Only after his account went delinquent.So what, they still can't try to work it out. After all, he did try to resolvethe situation by calling them. Of course, he tried to be responsible, but, heh,they don't need to try. Sure.

Yeah .. AFTER he was forced into being responsible for his delinquentaccount. Why should Enmax bend over backwards for someone who doesn't paytheir bills?

Post by Tom2Tec| > 2) They cut people off without trying to phone or contact them at the| time.|| Bullcrap .. I have friends who are always late with their bills and| constantly get notices in the mail.They have your phone number, they can't call it? But hey, they can send someoneto make sure the get thier $65. Yup, such care, such concern, suchprofessionalism. We should be really proud of how our City treats people whenthey're down.

Why are people so surprised when their utilites get cut off? The guy knew hedidn't pay .. so why wait until it got cut off to complain? The lettersusually give you a week or more before the cutoff to contact them.

Post by Tom2Tec| > 3) They charge people who are already in fiscal trouble|| Is it Enmax's job to determine who is in fiscal trouble and who isn't? Can I| call up Shaw and tell them to stop charging me because I am in "fiscal| trouble"? Of course not .. Enmax provided a service and they expect to be| paid.Sheesh, no one suggested not paying at all. Would it hurt to defer some part ofthe bill for some time? Or set up a budget? Or not charge such high fees? Or, atleast, try to be less avaricious, demanding and inflexible?

Is Enmax in the financial planning business? Why should it be theirresponsibility to set up a budget for someone? Did this guy do things liketrying to reduce his electricity consumption?

Post by Tom2Tec| > 4) They charge people too much in general, ie. millions in profits|| Welcome to capitalism 101. Businesses are in existance to make money. Did| the OP do anything to reduce his power consumption? Was he living outside| his means?Capitalism, ROTFLMAO ... corruption is more like it. Oh my, are you naive.

Explain how it's corruption. I have never seen evidence of this.

Post by Tom2Tec| > 5) They demand a deposit BEFORE reconnection|| Can you blame them? They are taking the risk of reconnecting someone with a| history of not paying.Yes, yes I can. What risk? People will be back, everyone needs power. Besides,there's collection agencies and other avenues. Besides, why is the deposit soneedlessly high. It's just another penalty, in my opinion

What risk?? The guy didn't pay his bill .. he might not again.

Post by Tom2Tec| > 6) They don't accept credit card payments|| I can't comment on this as I pay all my bills online. But if I recall can't| you pay your bills at the most banks? This guy was unemployed .. spend $2| and take a bus to Enmax.No, they want you to pay cash and they want you to do it a city hall duringoffice hours.

Since he was unemployed he could have hopped a bus and went to pay.

Post by Tom2Tec| > 7) They charge people to reconnect|| Yeah .... so?Yup, that helps the situation. Thiers anyways.

Post by Tom2Tec8) They charge fees (penalties) in addition to disconnect, reconnect and

| deposit| > costs|| Don't default on payments and you'll never see these fees.Duh, yup must be nice to be always affluent. How is perfection?

As I said before I went through a time of unemployment and called Enmaxbefore my account went delinquent. They were more then happy to worksomething out.

Post by Tom2Tec| > 9) They seem to deliberately try to disconnect people in order to generate| extra| > revenue|| I have never heard of a customer who pays their bills on time ever getting| disconnected and charged for reconnection. Funny how it works that way.See above. Boy, for a perfect person, you're not very compassionate, caring,concerned, humane, kind, or understanding, are you?

And yes I am a compassionate person .. but not to people who don't takeresponsibility.

Post by Tom2Tec| > 10) They are the least accommodating of the four public utilities|| You know how many times I have had to contact Enmax in the last 3 years?| Twice ... once to get power turned on in my old place and another time when| I moved. Both times the CSR were very friendly and my power was hooked up| when promised.Yup, that makes it all ok alright. Now if only everyone was perfect.

Just citing an example to counter your claim.

Post by Tom2Tec| > 11) They only accept payments with faxed proof, even if you don't have a| fax or| > even a phone|| Can you blame them? How else would you suggest they get proof? As far as| having to fax ... Mailboxes Etc.Yes, remember, the issue here is what happens when people are broke. Oh, hey, Ithought you were perfect, did you overlook something? Awww ..

So you what are you trying to say here? That a business should continueproviding a service to someone who doesn't pay?

Post by Tom2Tec| > 12) They refuse to connect you with a supervisor|| Never tried to so I can't comment.So you say nothing?

What do you want me to say? I never tried so I make no comment. I could lieand say I did but why bother?

Post by Tom2Tec| > 13) They refuse to negotiate in any way at that point|| Bull! As I stated before I had to call them when I was unemployed and| negotiated a payment plan so my power didn't get cut off. But I did this| BEFORE the payment was late.On this I agree, he should have called earlier. However, many poor people aresimply not as on the ball as you. Enmax needs to deal with all people. Theycannot expect not to have some people who aren't as competent as others. It'stheir responsibility to deal with us. Not our responsibility to be perfect.

Wow ... we agree. :) Cool stuff.I have a hard time accepting the excuse of not being on the ball. Everyoneshould know that you pay your bills every month. Do people really expect thebills to just go away? It isn't really rocket science.

Post by Tom2Tec| > 14) You cannot pay the guy when he comes to disconnect you|| Aren't those guys sub-contractors? Or am I thinking Shaw?So, he's still there. Oh, and subcontracting. Oh, and hiring subs, that's notvery responsible.

So .. Enmax uses subcontractors? If they do why is it not responsible?

Post by Tom2Tec| > 15) They will not accept partial payments| Bull .. see 13.Whatever, they could be more flexible and you know it. You're just convenientlyavoiding the issue

I am avoiding nothing. When I couldn't pay my full Enmax bill when I wasunemployed I paid part of it. Enmax was happy.

Post by Tom2Tec| > 17) The bills have been getting higher and higher for years now|| So is the cost of mustard. It's known as inflation.LOL, Enmax's bills, fees and penalties have risen far faster than inflation. Ashave their salaries. That is the problem.

Fees and penalties can be avoided.

Post by Tom2Tec| > 18) They are no longer responsive or accountable to your alderman's| inquiries|| Can't comment on this.Of course, nothing to say eh. Fiqures.

Again .. what do you want me to do? Lie? I have never talked to my aldermanregarding this. I have never heard of Enmax ignoring aldermen.

Post by Tom2Tec| > 19) They come across as arrogant, demanding, uncaring and

unsympathetic

Post by Tom2Tec|| To delinquent accounts they probably are. To responsible people they are| quite friendly and accomidating.Boy, and I bet that helps. Oh, and it's justified. Everbody knows how useful itis to beat a dying dead or dying horse.

What more can I say? Put yourself in their position .. would you be allhappy and friendly to someone who doesn't pay their bills?

Post by Tom2Tec| > 20) The top guy doubled his salary to 600K over the last three years|| And ...? What's your point?Duh.Enmax 'efforts' well paid byDon Braid For The Calgary Herald Friday, October 03,2003"Enmax CEO Bob Nicolay earned $698,468 in 2002, well over twice his totalcompensation only two years earlier, when he was paid $340,015. In 2001, Nicolayand other senior Enmax officials also received large extra payments for "specialefforts" in preparing the taxpayer-owned utility for private sale, although itwas never sold. Nicolay got $148,606 in 2001 under the heading "all othercompensation," which includes both the sale efforts and pension entitlementspaid for him by the company. Nicolay's total pay in 2002 certainly vaults him tothe top of the list for Calgary bosses of publicly-owned enterprises. Jack Davismade $520,000 heading the Calgary Health Region. Dale Stanway, the city's CEO,earned about $233,000. Nonetheless, Enmax doesn't seem to think facts aboutexecutive pay are news. I do believe they're news, partly because Enmax wants toget rid of 200 jobs, and is applying to charge customers 11 per cent more forelectricity. This seems to be the wonderful world of deregulation as it appliesto a city-owned utility; higher rates for consumers, higher pay for topexecutives and fewer jobs for employees further down the ladder. Nicolay's pay,and that of other senior officials, is studied annually by a committee andapproved by the board, which includes two aldermen (currently, Dale Hodges andBob Hawkesworth.) The salaries were disclosed through a regulatory filing inthe taxpayers, as indirect owners, have every right to know all the details, andto ask what we're getting for such whopping salaries at the top. The company ismaking more money -- profits went from $44 million in 1999 to $249 million twoyears later. As much as $50 million of that comes back into city coffers as adividend that can be used for roads, services or to help keep down taxes. Butit's fascinating to compare Enmax with Edmonton's Epcor, also

taxpayer-owned,

Post by Tom2Tecwhich holds $4.7 billion in assets compared to $1.2 billion for Enmax, and makesmore than twice the profits. Don Lowry, Epcor's CEO, made $706,000 in 2002, just$8,000 more than Nicolay. You can hardly blame Nicolay for taking the money. Thequestion is, does Enmax's position as a rather small utility justify suchcompensation? Enmax certainly thinks so. "Compensation is no different at Enmaxthan at most companies," says spokesman Tony McCallum. "It's based on themidpoint of what most companies are paying for similar positions. It's alsobased on individual performance and the company's success at meeting itstargets." The Calgary customer/owner, facing another rate hike, might haveanother view of success, and what these people should be paid. In 2002,Nicolay's earnings of $698,468 were comprised of $390,260 in salary, $230,000 inbonus, $11,400 as "other annual compensation" and $66,808 under the heading "allother compensation." In 2000, his total pay of $340,015 was made up of $225,000in salary, a bonus of $80,000, and $35,015 under the two headings of "othercompensation." Sean Durfy, vice-president of unregulated business, made a totalof $356,175 in 2002, up from $229,715 in 2000. Executive vice-president RandallHenderson, who joined Enmax in 2001, earned $333,662 in 2002. Karen AnnePrentice, vice-president of legal affairs, made $311,997 in 2002, compared to$205,995 in 2000. Customer service vice-president Lori Rae Topp, who has sinceleft Enmax, was paid $294,545 in 2002. She had joined the company in 2001. Theseexecutives saw substantial jumps in their extra pay during 2001, for "one-timecompensation for special efforts rendered during the proposed sale of Enmax." Inthe regulatory sense, this was all properly disclosed. But there was no effortwhatever, either from city hall or the company, to make the public aware of thefacts. For a taxpayer-owned enterprise, that won't do."

Post by Tom2Tec9E09-487E51EA03AF| > 21) They could limit your power consumption instead of cutting you off| > completely|| How can they limit your power? No power between certain hours? I am sure| people would be pissed to have their freezer full of food spoiling. Cut the| power by 50%? Wouldn't this play havoc on any electrical device you have?They have and can use a device that limits wattage. No, no it only means you canonly run one thing at a time. It's an inconvenience, but it allows your furnaceto maintain heat, and your fridge to keep all your food from spoiling. By law,they must use it in the winter. Of course, without the law, I'd bet theywouldn't bother. Face it, they're uncaring and self serving. They don't give ash*t if people freeze or starve,

Hmm .. ok, I didn't know such a device existed. But I see that as relievingpeople of personal responsibility. If you know you are struggling then puton a sweater don't turn up the heat. Do you have too many lights on? Thereare ways a person can reduce their consumption. Why is it Enmax'sresponsibility to limit power intake?

Post by Tom2Tec|| > 22) A court has already said that the penalties they used to charge were| illegal| > yet the new fees that replaced them are even higher, of course, theyr'e| not| > called the same|| I hadn't heard this. Got any citations?Yup, why can't you do your own research?Hobsbawn v. Enmax Corporation and The City of Calgary

You made the claim so I asked for a citation. A perfectly reasonablerequest.

I found only one link to this. It is quite long so I will read it andcomment later.

Post by Tom2Tec| > I've spoken with every level of management at Enmax recently and I can| speak| > from personal experience. I believe that the upper management at Enmax are| > simply in self serving denial. They believe that all of their policies are| > justified and they don't see any need to change anything. They also don't| feel| > that the public has the right to question what they consider is private| business| > policy. They also think that cutting of customers in such a manner is| effective| > and conscientious customer service. I know this because I've questioned| these| > policies and procedures directly with the person who is in charge of| > implementing them. He is absolutely convinced he's fully justified in| treating| > people in the way he sees fit without needing to consider any| alternatives.|| Might I ask what circumstances forced you to speak with every level of| management? Except for the two times (as I mentioned above) I have never had| to contact anyone at Enmax.Sure you can ask. What difference would it make? We weren't discussing myadvocacy.

What I am getting at is why should you expect shiny happy people at Enmaxwhen you (not you in particular) are delinquent on your account?

Post by Tom2Tec| Why should Enmax be responsible for people who can't manage money? Do you| think Visa would be all "Aww shucks mister .. you spent all your money on| beer and smokes and can't pay us? That's all right, you can catch us next| time."Duh, Enmax isn't Visa, it's monopolistic public utility which provides anecessity, that's why they are responsible. Why do I bother explaining this toyou. Obviously you can't get it. IMHO, it appears that you're just not caring ordeep enough or you're too biased. Sad really.

So because I don't agree with you .. I don't get it??

I am a very caring person. I just have no time for people who areirresponsible and want companies to baby them.

Post by Tom2Tec| Can you imagine how many people are late with their bills or don't pay at| all? Enmax has bills of their own to pay as well. If you ran a business and| provided a service would you take the excuse of not being able to balance| your checkbook from your customers?I have and do run a business. I did and do better, and I didn't and don't expectexcessive compensation. Nor did I have my customers over a barrel.

So now take what you do and multiply it by 100,000 .. you then have Enmax.Why shouldn't there be a bit of a penalty for people who don't takeresponsibility with their bills?

Post by Tom2Tec| Enmax's responsibility? As I see it they need to provide me with electricity| 24/7. And I have always received that from them. (of course with the| exception of interruptions out of their control .. ie: weather). They are| not there to cut the little guy some slack. They are there to make money.| They area business.No, they don't. Never had a power outage? Ever been compensated? By the way,they aren't a business, they're a utility, and a public one. Get over it. Facefacts. Stop twisting words.

If the power outage is a result of weather why should I be compensated?So now Enmax isn't a business? What is the difference between a business andutility?

Post by Tom2Tec| What basis do you have to make the comment "our bills should be getting LESS| expensive "? Should a company stop making money after a certain point?See above. It's the same lame and false argument.

Well since I am not sure how you differentiate a business and utility Ican't comment.

Post by Tom2Tec|| "We're penalized when we don't conform to their policies"?? Well duh! What| good would policies be if there were no penalties for breaking them?|| Bottom line is if you are responsible with your bills, live within your| means and take measures before your account becomes delinquent you won't| have any problems.Ahh, Mr. The World Is Perfect, so therefore others must be losers attitude.That's just a shallow justification for the mistreatment of others in my view.

This seems to be the crux of our disagreement. I am more for personalresponsibility.

Post by Tom2Tec2tec ~ thinks bullies are bad.On December 11th Enmax filed its Regulatory Rate Option with Lethbridge CityCouncil. Included in the rates is a $10.00 per month charge for invoiceprocessing. This appears to be the cost of an envelope and postage. The chargeis excessive and negates half of the monthly rebate provided by the provincialgovernment, guaranteeing that regulated rate option customers in Lethbridge willpay more in 2001 than in 2000. Enmax would not appear to be a company that hasthe customers interests at heart. Customers who choose Enmax may beinadvertently subsidizing the city of Calgary.www.iasa.ca/ED_documents_IASA/Issue09.htmlwww.iasa.ca/ED_documents_IASA/Issue09.html

Look, nothing personal, but it seems that you may think of yourself as caringbut really, it just seems to me that you care more about companies and profitsthan people. As well, perhaps someday maybe, perhaps, you'll realize that allpeople aren't all as capable, or all as fortunate as you are and have been.Perhaps someday you'll be in a situation where you must depend on theforgiveness or kindness of others. I'm sure you'd appreciate a little slackthen. This is called being humane. Humane, human ... see any connection? To meit just seems like you're advocating kicking people when they're already downand out rather than trying to help them get back on their feet.

Utilities provide necessities at a minimal expense ... companies sell productsfor profits. There is a difference. Or there was.

If these guys had invested their own capital and built the business themselvesbased on a good product at a fair price, I'd have a lot more sympathy for theirposition. The truth is, we the taxpayers paid to build this system. It was builtto serve all the citizens of Calgary. Why should it be transformed into aprivate concern for a privleged few that we have no real control over and isused to profit from our one of our most basic and unavoidable necessities? Aswell, we don't seem to have any real alternatives to their policies or prices.

Of course, this is just my perspective. I guess everyone should just see it theway you and Enmax want. I guess I really should expect to have no right to havea different perspective on this. Oh, and let's not even attempt to be humane inany way, let's just expect people to always serve some big businesses interests.After all, it seems that Enmax's profits are more important than people'sproblems.

Oh, and $137 million in profits next year and what, Enmax can't afford to let afew dollars slide for a month or two. Oh yah, right, this guy's obviously adeadbeat trying to rip them off. He's going to skip town because of an overdueelectric bill. In fact, we're all gone to rip off Enmax and move to Mexico orsomething, Yup, that's what I'm planning. Me and thousands of other deadbeatCalgarians.

Man, I can't wait until the corporations really finish taking over. Boy, is thatgoing to be a lot of fun.

Post by Tom2Tec| Bullcrap .. I have friends who are always late with their bills and| constantly get notices in the mail.They have your phone number, they can't call it? But hey, they can send someoneto make sure the get their $65. Yup, such care, such concern, suchprofessionalism. We should be really proud of how our City treats people whenthey're down.

Why should "they" call? It's the delinquent who's responsible for paying thebills on time. If they don't, then they don't deserve free service. Being 'down'or 'up' doesn't have anything to do with purchasing goods or services. If youcan't aford something, and you hope that someonme will loan you some or givesome to you for free, then it's up to you to grovel, beg, and plead for suchgifts.

Post by Tom2Tec| .. Enmax provided a service and they expect to be| paid.Sheesh, no one suggested not paying at all. Would it hurt to defer some part ofthe bill for some time? Or set up a budget? Or not charge such high fees? Or, atleast, try to be less avaricious, demanding and inflexible?

People who approach their creditors for deferrals, budget plans, and so forthare better treated than those who just skive off and pay nothing at all. That'sbeen a repeated theme of this thread. As to the high fees... say what? A measly$65.00 to reconnect is hardly exorbitant, especially given the administrativecosts involved in trying to track delinquents. Wht should the honest subsidisethe dishonest?

Post by Tom2Tec| Can you blame them? They are taking the risk of reconnecting someone with a| history of not paying.Yes, yes I can. What risk? People will be back, everyone needs power. Besides,there's collection agencies and other avenues. Besides, why is the deposit soneedlessly high. It's just another penalty, in my opinion

Tracking the thieving scioundrels isn't cheap, nor are collection agencies (theytake a cut off the top for anything they manage to recover). Nor will 'everyone'be back; some might just be fleeing to some other jurisdiction, and the soonerthey're cut off the less they'll be able to steal. The deposit not only helpsrecover at least some of the costs of delinquent accounts, it also helpsdiscourage others from trying the same line of theft.

Post by Tom2TecNo, they want you to pay cash and they want you to do it a city hall duringoffice hours.

So? Now you expect the company to hire extra staff for evening or midnight shiftjust for the convenience of thieves?

Post by Tom2Tec| Don't default on payments and you'll never see these fees.Duh, yup must be nice to be always affluent. How is perfection?

Once more your train of thought has fallen off the tracks. Affluence andperfection aren't what's required. People can be late with their payments, evenrepeatedly, without being cut off. Neglecting any payment for months at a timeis not just a wee hair short of perfection; it's profligate irresponsibility.

Post by Tom2Tec| I have never heard of a customer who pays their bills on time ever getting| disconnected and charged for reconnection. Funny how it works that way.See above. Boy, for a perfect person, you're not very compassionate, caring,concerned, humane, kind, or understanding, are you?

You don't seem to show any caring for the honest souls who have to subsidize theslack-ass losers who fail to pay on time.

Post by Tom2TecYes, remember, the issue here is what happens when people are broke.

The issue here is what happens when people stop paying for the services theywant; they soon stop getting those services. Nobody deserves everything forfree.

Post by Tom2TecIt's their responsibility to deal with us. Not our responsibility to be perfect.

And they DO deal with the imperfect according to what they deserve. Those whopay, get power. Those who don't, don't.

You might want to look into that! I took over a house four years agowhereby the tenant went into arrears by a very long time. Enmax actuallyshut off the premises. They had instructions on the paper as to what to dowith the pipes etc. to protect them from freezing. That was the last timeI was a Landlord. Sold the damn thing.

ManyYears ago, when it wasn't called Enmax, a fire occurred in a dwellingbecause a couple tried to heat their home with a propane bbq after being cutoff.

Cut offs do and will occur . It's not illegal for them to stop a servicethey aren't being paid for.

Rockboy <***@rockboy.net> wrote in message news:Bishb.6728$***@edtnps84...

| > 5) They demand a deposit BEFORE reconnection

| So what you're saying is... When dealing with someone with a proven| track record of not paying their bills they should go ahead and| recconect them, and then sit and wait around for a deposit to show up?

Post by Tom2Tec| > 5) They demand a deposit BEFORE reconnection| So what you're saying is... When dealing with someone with a proven| track record of not paying their bills they should go ahead and| recconect them, and then sit and wait around for a deposit to show up?What proven track record?Sure, why not? Enmax could afford to be a little trusting.

A little trusting?! As an Enmax shareholder, I would be livid if theyconducted business like that. They would be bankrupt within a few months.

| A little trusting?! As an Enmax shareholder, I would be livid if they| conducted business like that. They would be bankrupt within a few months.

Total bullshit, it wouldn't even dent their current profits. BTFW, I am ashareholder. In fact I help pay to build the system, as have all of us who havelived here our entire lives. Fat lot of good that does. In my opinion, they'restealing our public infrastructure so they can use it for private, personalgain.

Post by Tom2Tec| A little trusting?! As an Enmax shareholder, I would be livid if they| conducted business like that. They would be bankrupt within a few months.Total bullshit, it wouldn't even dent their current profits. BTFW, I am ashareholder. In fact I help pay to build the system, as have all of us who havelived here our entire lives. Fat lot of good that does. In my opinion, they'restealing our public infrastructure so they can use it for private, personalgain.

Every citizen in Calgary is a shareholder. So they stole your publicly run,inefficient institution, and turned it into a profitable private ( althoughthe EXACT same people own it as before ).

You greatly misuse the term personal. If by personal you mean the socialcollective of Calgary, then I suppose you are right.

Post by Tom2Tec| > 5) They demand a deposit BEFORE reconnection| So what you're saying is... When dealing with someone with a proven| track record of not paying their bills they should go ahead and| recconect them, and then sit and wait around for a deposit to show up?What proven track record?Sure, why not? Enmax could afford to be a little trusting.

A little trusting?! As an Enmax shareholder, I would be livid if theyconducted business like that. They would be bankrupt within a few months.

but are we not shareholders of Enmax's parent corporation? (theCity of Calgary)

Post by Tom2Tec| > 5) They demand a deposit BEFORE reconnection| So what you're saying is... When dealing with someone with a proven| track record of not paying their bills they should go ahead and| recconect them, and then sit and wait around for a deposit to show up?What proven track record?Sure, why not? Enmax could afford to be a little trusting.

No business can afford to trust customers who won't pay their bills.Nor should they.

Post by Tom2Tec| So what you're saying is... When dealing with someone with a proven| track record of not paying their bills they should go ahead and| recconect them, and then sit and wait around for a deposit to show up?What proven track record?Sure, why not? Enmax could afford to be a little trusting.

Iif they keep supplying power at no charge they won't be able to 'afford' muchtrust.

Post by Tom2Tec| So what you're saying is... When dealing with someone with a proven| track record of not paying their bills they should go ahead and| recconect them, and then sit and wait around for a deposit to show up?What proven track record?Sure, why not? Enmax could afford to be a little trusting.

Iif they keep supplying power at no charge they won't be able to 'afford' muchtrust.

If they are making millions fo rthe Mayor to by parkland (outsidethe city limits) they are obviously charging more than they needfor operational cost and capital improvements...

BTW the enmax crews that deal with street lights etc. Does thecity pay for that on a separate invoice? or is that also paid outof the home/business consumer billings??

Post by Tom2Tec1) He did call and he did make arrangement, which Enmax didn't keep.

What history has he had with late payments and arrangements? Did he keepthem before? Not saying he's wrong but without knowing more about thisaccount one only sees his side... ( no I don't side with Enmax )

Post by Tom2Tec2) They cut people off without trying to phone or contact them at the time.

I understand the number of accounts being cut off is so ridiculously high itwould take a long time to warn clients. Enmax sends out warnings via mail.The time allotted to pay up is sufficient enough to make whateverarrangements needed. Some people just wait too long to work something outwith them.

I don't agree with them doing that either. However Enmax no longer doestheir own cutoffs or reconnections. By hiring a contractor they say thefee is necessary. $65? Jeez, the wannabe tech makes lots on defaultaccounts this way. I'm sure Enmax keeps a portion, but so does thecontractor.

Post by Tom2Tec4) They charge people too much in general, ie. millions in profits

I had a freind of mine in Toronto who couldn't pay and couldn't make anyarrangements either. Obviously not Enmax. Knowing this idiot would showup, he gaff taped the shit out of the meter and this guy spent a very longtime there trying to change the head off the meter. He was pissed offenough to have left the home. God I wish I could have seen that.

Post by Tom2Tec22) A court has already said that the penalties they used to charge were illegal

| What history has he had with late payments and arrangements? Did he keep| them before? Not saying he's wrong but without knowing more about this| account one only sees his side... ( no I don't side with Enmax )|| > 2) They cut people off without trying to phone or contact them at the| time.|| I understand the number of accounts being cut off is so ridiculously high it| would take a long time to warn clients. Enmax sends out warnings via mail.| The time allotted to pay up is sufficient enough to make whatever| arrangements needed. Some people just wait too long to work something out| with them.

Why do you think the numbers of accounts beening cut off is so high? Perhapsbecause Enmaxs profits each time they cut someone off. Doesn't anyone see thatthis is wide open to abuse?

Sure, some people wait too long. So, not everyone is perfect. People are oftenbarely able to manage. Enmax doesn't help such people, it dumps on them. Boy,now isn't that humane and responsible of them?

|| > 3) They charge people who are already in fiscal trouble|| I don't agree with them doing that either. However Enmax no longer does| their own cutoffs or reconnections. By hiring a contractor they say the| fee is necessary. $65? Jeez, the wannabe tech makes lots on default| accounts this way. I'm sure Enmax keeps a portion, but so does the| contractor.

Yup, everbody wins. Oh, except those in dire straights. How kind, eh?

| > 4) They charge people too much in general, ie. millions in profits|| I agree more control is needed here.

Me too! Of course, it hurts the fixed and low income people the most. My, hownoble that is eh.

| > 13) They refuse to negotiate in any way at that point|| I had a hard year many moons ago. I found them very accomodating the couple| times I needed to work with them.

Yah, they were much better back then. So much for why they get such big salariesnow.|| > 14) You cannot pay the guy when he comes to disconnect you|| Again, a contractor who preys on default accounts.

Prey is exactly the word I'd use too.

| I had a freind of mine in Toronto who couldn't pay and couldn't make any| arrangements either. Obviously not Enmax. Knowing this idiot would show| up, he gaff taped the shit out of the meter and this guy spent a very long| time there trying to change the head off the meter. He was pissed off| enough to have left the home. God I wish I could have seen that.

ROTFLMAO. Actually, they can't assault you, so if you stand in front, they guyhas to leave, but then they send out a service truck and cut off people at thepole. That costs the person who's cut off more than a hundred. So they win nomatter what.

| > 22) A court has already said that the penalties they used to charge wereillegal

| would love to read that case

Sorry, can't find the news article. Damn, anyone else keep it?

2tec ~ prefers Davids to Goliaths

David

Goliath stood up clear in the assumption of status,Strong and unquestioning of himself and others,Fully determined by the limits of his experience.I have seen such a one among surgeons, seargents,Deans, and giants, the power implicit.

Then there was David, who made few assumptions,Had little experience, but for more was ready.Testing and trying this pebble or that pebble.This giant or that giant.He is not infrequent.

How could Goliath guess, with his many assumptions.The force of the sling shot of the pure-hearted?How could David fear, with his few hypotheses.The power of status which is but two footed?So he shot, and shouted!

Post by Tom2Tec| What history has he had with late payments and arrangements? Did he keep| them before? Not saying he's wrong but without knowing more about this| account one only sees his side... ( no I don't side with Enmax )|| > 2) They cut people off without trying to phone or contact them at the| time.|| I understand the number of accounts being cut off is so ridiculously high it| would take a long time to warn clients. Enmax sends out warnings via mail.| The time allotted to pay up is sufficient enough to make whatever| arrangements needed. Some people just wait too long to work something out| with them.Why do you think the numbers of accounts beening cut off is so high? Perhapsbecause Enmaxs profits each time they cut someone off. Doesn't anyone see thatthis is wide open to abuse?

Right, companies make MORE money by forcing their customers to NOT use theirproduct. I understand why you are anti-capitalist now.

Post by Tom2TecSure, some people wait too long. So, not everyone is perfect. People are oftenbarely able to manage. Enmax doesn't help such people, it dumps on them. Boy,now isn't that humane and responsible of them?

If Enmax stopped cutting people off, then what is the incentive to pay?! Youdon't pay, you don't get the product. Seems to work in every other industry,no? I must admit that I WISH people didn't get cut off. I WISH people couldalways pay their bills. However, I also WISH people would get theirpriorities straight and realize that paying their ENMAX bill is moreimportant than one more pack of smokes.

Post by Tom2Tec|| > 3) They charge people who are already in fiscal trouble|| I don't agree with them doing that either. However Enmax no longer does| their own cutoffs or reconnections. By hiring a contractor they say the| fee is necessary. $65? Jeez, the wannabe tech makes lots on default| accounts this way. I'm sure Enmax keeps a portion, but so does the| contractor.Yup, everbody wins. Oh, except those in dire straights. How kind, eh?

Part of it is punitive, so that you LEARN to pay your bills on time. "Gee,paying that $65 was a pain in the ass, I had better pay my bills from nowon!"

Post by Tom2Tec| > 4) They charge people too much in general, ie. millions in profits|| I agree more control is needed here.Me too! Of course, it hurts the fixed and low income people the most. My, hownoble that is eh.| > 13) They refuse to negotiate in any way at that point|| I had a hard year many moons ago. I found them very accomodating the couple| times I needed to work with them.Yah, they were much better back then. So much for why they get such big salariesnow.|| > 14) You cannot pay the guy when he comes to disconnect you|| Again, a contractor who preys on default accounts.Prey is exactly the word I'd use too.| I had a freind of mine in Toronto who couldn't pay and couldn't make any| arrangements either. Obviously not Enmax. Knowing this idiot would show| up, he gaff taped the shit out of the meter and this guy spent a very long| time there trying to change the head off the meter. He was pissed off| enough to have left the home. God I wish I could have seen that.ROTFLMAO. Actually, they can't assault you, so if you stand in front, they guyhas to leave, but then they send out a service truck and cut off people at thepole. That costs the person who's cut off more than a hundred. So they win nomatter what.

They don't 'win' if you pay your bill. Maybe these people should put as mucheffort into obtaining gainful employment as they do into 'winning' againstThe Man.

Post by Tom2Tec| > 22) A court has already said that the penalties they used to charge wereillegal.

No, a court ruled that the 5%/mth interest they charged for late payment wasexcessive. This happened in Ontario or Quebec. They have since changed it.

Post by Tom2Tec| would love to read that caseSorry, can't find the news article. Damn, anyone else keep it?2tec ~ prefers Davids to GoliathsDavidGoliath stood up clear in the assumption of status,Strong and unquestioning of himself and others,Fully determined by the limits of his experience.I have seen such a one among surgeons, seargents,Deans, and giants, the power implicit.Then there was David, who made few assumptions,Had little experience, but for more was ready.Testing and trying this pebble or that pebble.This giant or that giant.He is not infrequent.How could Goliath guess, with his many assumptions.The force of the sling shot of the pure-hearted?How could David fear, with his few hypotheses.The power of status which is but two footed?So he shot, and shouted!~ Josephine Miles

Post by OgreManThey don't 'win' if you pay your bill. Maybe these people should put as mucheffort into obtaining gainful employment as they do into 'winning' againstThe Man.

Geez, it would be great if companies that people worked for wouldn't lay offtheir employees so that they could keep gainful employement that they had,to pay the bills that keep coming in. I mean, the nerver of companies,wanting more "profit" so they close down locations to be able to pocket themoney as opposed to keeping them open and paying salaries. Thereby forcingthe working man to have an unexpected change in his lifes status, and becomea deadbeat. I can see exactly what you mean.

Post by Tom2TecWhy do you think the numbers of accounts beening cut off is so high? Perhapsbecause Enmaxs profits each time they cut someone off. Doesn't anyone see thatthis is wide open to abuse?

Letting people have power for free would most certainly be wide open to abuse,and no matter what _I_ did I'd be a victim of that abuse. Anyone who pays theirbills as contracted has to cover the costs of delinquents.

Calling them Corporate Greed doesn't make them any less correct. You usetheir power, you pay for it. It's that simple.

Post by CooterSince July 1/03 I have not worked, due to a injury i got playing soft ball( no more sliding I will be a stand up player from now on). And in coursewith not working bills get behind!So in Sept Corporate Greed Inc (ENMAX) sent me a disconnection notice.Understandable.So after futile attempts at making payment arrangements (not willing toexcept any of course).I swallowed my pride and went out to seek assistancebefore the cut off date.I found some very nice peeps at the Salvation Army. (Boy do I have a BIGdonation to make when I start working again) who were willing to offerassistance.The said it would take a week for them to get it to CorporateGreed.I immediately called Corporate Greed and informed them what was happening.Told them the money would be mailed out by those wonderful peeps at theSalvation Army, and would arrive late the next week, and even told them itwould most likely be Thursday or Friday.young guy says OK he will extend the cut off date till then.Well! On the Thursday guess what.DARKNESS FELL!yup, with agreements made and the check in the mail BOOM!So I run to my neighbors and called Corporate Greed and asked them whathappened? Why was I cut off?they said they money was supposed to be in last week. I informed them Icalled them and told them The money would be in today or tomorrow and thatit would be extended till then!(obviously it didn't make it in on theThursday).Well apparently they had no record of that call. (surprise surprise). I hadto get The beautiful peeps at the Salvation Army to fax them the details.Had to be letter head and faxed as Corporate Greed wouldn't trust them.Afterthe fax was sent Corporate Greed had me reconnected that nite. Very timelyresponse I must say and appreciated.Did it end there?OF course not.I just got my Corporate Greed bill and guess what?Charged for the reconnection ($67.28)AND a Deposit of $210.00 due to mydisconnection!!!!!!!Lovely peeps I just spoke to at Corporate Greed. (Their call center staffare very good!I would hate to deal with someone like me when i get irate!)and now expecting a call back tomorrow (maybe) from a supervisor.Bet I can guess what the supervisor will say . "No record of the call sosorry we can't waive the fee's."Now this is a city owned business and they forget who pays the bills. Theyhave a monopoly and ding us to no end!They WILL NOT accept responsibility for there mistakes and the little guygets screwed again. For give me for spending money on food and shelter!Another highlight of the bill is this......I got a $7.75 credit for a then a few lines later I get a "Cost RecoveryRider" of $5.77Sound like they are trying to recover from the "Elec Energy Charge Adj"Have you looked at you bill in detail? Amazing the things that are on there.Nothing makes you feel like a small fish in a large ocean then dealing witha monopoly. (or would that small fish swallowed by a large fish)Sorry to carry on about my feelings but DAM it made me feel better!(And I will send this forth to Corporate Greed depending on the response Iget from the supervisor)

If he's on dial up... the cost is next to nothing. yet when people are indire straights and you find them drinking booze or racking up expenses onsmokes what are the comments then? Let's not be quick to poke at him. Whenmoney is limited, this may be the only way to keep the mind off theproblems. JMO

Post by HDIf he's on dial up... the cost is next to nothing. yet when people are indire straights and you find them drinking booze or racking up expenses onsmokes what are the comments then? Let's not be quick to poke at him.

When

Post by HDmoney is limited, this may be the only way to keep the mind off theproblems. JMO

When money is limited the first thing to be cut is entertainment expenses.And for the vast majority of people that's exactly what the internet is ..entertainment.